How JustAnswer Works:
  • Ask an Expert
    Experts are full of valuable knowledge and are ready to help with any question. Credentials confirmed by a Fortune 500 verification firm.
  • Get a Professional Answer
    Via email, text message, or notification as you wait on our site. Ask follow up questions if you need to.
  • 100% Satisfaction Guarantee
    Rate the answer you receive.
Ask socrateaser Your Own Question
socrateaser, Lawyer
Category: California Employment Law
Satisfied Customers: 39172
Experience:  Retired (mostly)
Type Your California Employment Law Question Here...
socrateaser is online now
A new question is answered every 9 seconds

Hi ~ Substitute teacher here again - I have an unrelated

Resolved Question:

Hi ~
Substitute teacher here again - I have an unrelated appeal hearing this Tuesday. This appeal hearing is regarding reporting wages incorrectly. On a claim form in Sept I under reported my earnings by $50.00. I did not realize the error until the EDD requested information on my last employer which was school district A. I called the EDD on 10/25 and advised that I made this error. The overpayment resulted in approximately $7.00 and no overpayment was established. School district A pays $125.00 a day and school district B pays $100.00 a day. I have tried to be VERY CAREFUL in reporting all wages correctly and all other wages have been reported correctly, however, I am not perfect. I get paid once a month by each school district.

I explained to the EDD interviewer it was not an intentional mistake and I brought the mistake to their attention. She stated it was a one week penalty. I then received a disqualification letter for 5 weeks (so nice of her). I elected to get paid for the 5 weeks until my hearing.

What documentation should I bring to show it was not a willful misstatement with actual knowledge of falsity? I was going to bring documentation to show how much each districts pays and my testimony. Is that adequate? The EDD record of claim status interview (which I requested a week ago and received) also states "overpayment will not be established because it is under $50.00 ($7.00)".

From what I've read it appears the ALJ does not over turn these decisions because the botXXXXX XXXXXne is I reported the wages incorrectly? No room for mistakes in this system?
Submitted: 5 years ago.
Category: California Employment Law
Expert:  socrateaser replied 5 years ago.

Thanks for requesting me personally. However, please note that unless you actually use my userid ("socrateaser") in the title of your question, then another expert may jump in and answer. The fact that you direct the question me using the system options only locks the question until it times out. After that, anyone can answer.

That said, I have to run to an appointment, and I will get back with you later today or this evening.

Thanks for your understanding and cooperation.

Customer: replied 5 years ago.
Got it. Thanks
Expert:  socrateaser replied 5 years ago.
In Precedent Benefit Decision 72, the CUIAB defined "willfully" for the purposes of applying the penalty of UI Code 1257 (which is what's being assessed against you for the 5-week penalty), as "action...taken deliberately and intentionally and thus wilfully."

The point is that if you can convince the ALJ that your action was an inadvertant error, then the penalty period cannot be applied, because you did not act "willfully" in misreporting your wages.

You may want to consider stating that the amount of the reporting error is too small to be intentional, because no reasonable person would risk five weeks of unemployment benefits in exchange for an additional $7.00 in benefits.

Hope this helps.

NOTICE: My goal here is to educate the public about the law. Please help me in this effort by clicking Accept for my Answer to your Question.

And, if you need to contact me again, please put my user id on the title line of your question (“To Socrateaser”), and the system will send me an alert. Thanks!

socrateaser and other California Employment Law Specialists are ready to help you
Customer: replied 5 years ago.
Thanks. I've got to start thinking like an attorney.
Customer: replied 5 years ago.
The hearing took all of 5 minutes. She was rushing me through it. I think I got my point across ok she didn't seem that concerned about a $7.00 over payment.
Expert:  socrateaser replied 5 years ago.
De minimis non curat lex.

Attachments are only available to registered users.

Register Here
Customer: replied 5 years ago.
Ah a "great" attorney and he speaks latin :)
Expert:  socrateaser replied 5 years ago.

Attachments are only available to registered users.

Register Here
I'm flattered. Later.