STATE OF WISCONSIN
LABOR AND INDUSTRY REVIEW COMMISSION
P O BOX 8126, MADISON, WI 53708-8126 (608/266-9850)

JEFFREY W CASPERSON, Employee

UNEMPLOYMENT INSURANCE DECISION
Hearing No. 11605986MW


ORDER

Wisconsin Statute § 108.09(6)(d), provides that the commission may affirm, reverse, modify or set aside the appeal tribunal decision on the basis of the evidence previously submitted, may order the taking of additional evidence, or it may remand the matter to the department for further proceedings.

Pursuant to authority granted in Wis. Stat. § 108.09(6)(d), the commission sets aside the June 24, 2011 appeal tribunal decisions for hearing nos. 11605986MW and 11605988MW and the underlying determinations numbered 100621210 and 100621220 and remands the issues back to the department for a new investigation and determination regarding the employee's ability to work and availability for work, concealment and eligibility for or overpayment of unemployment insurance benefits as of week 46 of 2009.1(1)

This new investigation, involving both the concealment as it relates to the overpayment and forfeiture, should address the imposter claims pursuant to the investigation procedures set forth in Wis. Stat. § 108.095, which the commission referenced in Jenkins v. KFC Restaurant, UI Dec. Hearing No. 06000196MD (LIRC April 13, 2006). A UCFU-12214-E determination should be issued indicating whether or not another individual assumed the employee's identity and is responsible for the improperly paid benefits. Helpful to such an investigation may be the manner by which the applicable weekly claims were filed, if any departmental correspondence preceded any additional claims, how the benefits were paid and to which account they were deposited and whether the employee knowingly benefited from the payments. Additionally, if the employee revealed his PIN to another, why he did so (i.e. whether he has a physical or mental disability) and if he made any attempts to resecure the PIN. Finally, in determining credibility, a claimant's raising of disqualifying issues may be considered. See Margaret A. Sutinen, UI Dec. Hearing No. 02000105MD (LIRC July 18, 2002) and Scott Lynch, UI Dec. Hearing No. 10404406AP (LIRC March 11, 2011)

Dated and mailed December 16, 2011
caspeje : 150 : 6

BY THE COMMISSION:

/s/ Robert Glaser, Chairperson

Ann L. Crump, Commissioner

/s/ Laurie R. McCallum, Commissioner



[ Search UC Decisions ] - [ UC Digest - Main Index ] - [ UC Legal Resources ] - [ LIRC Home Page ]


uploaded 2012/01/03


Footnotes:

(1)( Back ) The two determinations and appeal tribunal decisions dealt with weeks 16 through 20 of 2010. However, department records reflect that claims were also filed for weeks 46 of 2009 through 1 of 2010 and weeks 2 through 4 of 2010. At the hearing before the ALJ, the employee testified that he had been incarcerated since August 22, 2009 (week 34 of 2009), when he was incarcerated without Huber privileges. These additional weeks result in total benefits paid of $3,126.00 (instead of $962.00) plus FAC.