Did IPSC Waive Its Right to Require Timely Premium Payments?
Finally, appellants argue that IPSC waived any requirement for timely premium payments because it accepted partial payments and previously had accepted late payments. As discussed above, “ERISA requires all modifications to an employee benefit plan to be written and to conform to the formal amendment procedures.” Miller, 978 F.2d at 624. In the instant case, the plan documents provided for monthly premium payments and cancellation of coverage for failure to pay. There is no evidence which suggests that IPSC ever modified its benefits plan through formal amendment procedures to provide for partial or late payments. In addition, as IPSC points out, appellants have failed to establish the elements of waiver. See K&T, Inc. v. Koroulis, 888 P.2d 623, 628 (Utah 1995). Thus, IPSC is entitled to summary judgment on appellants’ waiver claim. AFFIRMED.
