Employer Appeal State's Decision

[WDWCPS999]

What is the name of your state (only U.S. law)? California

I was fired in July for suspicion of theft. I had a phone hearing with the state in September and was deemed eligible for benefits. Now the company is appealing that decision and I have a hearing date. When I received the initial letter in the mail, notifying me of the pending hearing, there was a line in the letter that said....

"If the Administrative Law Judge who presides over your employer's appeal hearing finds you are not eligible, your benefits will stop. You may be require to repay the Department benefits received after the date thus notice is issued."

The words "received after" are underlined in the actual letter too. I keep trying to get a definitive answer but does this indicate that benefits received BEFORE this date will not need to be repayed? I ask because my last check arrived dated 9/28 and the date on the letter is 9/29. As of 9/26 I declined further benefits because I got a new job. I'm waiting on a call from the EDD to let me know for sure. If they say I won't have to repay anything from before that, I am not even going to go to the hearing out of fear of giving information that would cause more problems. I'd rather let them say I am no longer eligible and move on and hope my current employer doesn't lay me off anytime soon

 

[pattytx]

Depends on the state. In my previous state of Maryland, they did want them repaid (personal experience).

I wouldn't bother pursuing it, if they think you owe them back, they'll send you a letter.

 

[WDWCPS999]

But if there was a chance I would have to pay ALL of it back, wouldn't the letter have stated that?

 

[commentator]

Please go to the hearing and fight back. You got approved in the first place. This may mean you had a pretty good case. If you were approved in the beginning and received several months of benefits, you do not need to let them decide you were not ever eligible.

Because in every state I am familiar with, if you were determined to HAVE BEEN ineligible from the first moment you were terminated and filed, you'd have to pay it all back. You'd owe it all back...as far as having to pay right now, there's really not much they're going to be able to do about getting money back from people right now, as most of these overpaid people are really financially distressed. They'd probably just assess an overpayment, and keep it on your record until you filed again.

If you lose your appeal hearing, and then were laid off later and had to file, you'd have to have a certain amount of earnings requirements to begin drawing, and then you'd have to pay back any money they determine you do owe from this claim before you could get benefits.

I really don't know if they've established this policy in California right now due to the economy or whether they've always done it this way, so that if you were determined ineligible in this hearing, you'd only owe what you had received since the hearing overturned the original decision.

It'd be a good thing to do for people, in many cases, and CA u.i. law has a habit of being really merciful to claimants, but I'd certainly go to or attend the hearing by phone, even though you are now working again. You were terminated for stealing, but you were approved for benefits. Why allow the employer to go in and lie about it and get you determined ineligible, prove to the state that you were stealing, when you weren't? You can't give out new information that will hurt you with any place but unemployment. They don't press charges or contact other authorities whatever the case may be.