Heckaman v H & R Block
Digest no. 18.06
Cite as: Heckaman v H&R Block, unpublished opinion of the Michigan Employment Security Board of Review, issued September 24, 1979 (Docket No. O/P B78 50339 RO1 61223).
Appeal pending: No
Claimant: Helen A. Heckaman
Employer: H & R Block
Docket no.: O/P B78 50339 RO1 61223
Date of decision: September 24, 1979
BOARD OF REVIEW HOLDING: Where the employer submits new information concerning credit weeks after the monetary determination has become final and after the claimant has received benefits based on the prior information submitted by the employer, the claimant is not required to repay the benefits improperly paid.
FACTS: The employer submitted wage and credit week information to the Commission in early May, 1977. On May 12, 1977, the Commission issued determinations which established claimant’s benefit year and listed weeks of benefit entitlement chargeable to each base period employer. In subsequent weeks, claimant was paid the full amount of benefit entitlement. On August 8, 1977, the employer submitted information indicating claimant had two fewer credit weeks than had been reported originally in May. A redetermination issued November 15, 1977 held the claimant was required to repay benefits received for the period from July 3, 1977 through July 16, 1977.
DECISION: Pursuant to Section 32a(3) of the Act, the claimant is not required to pay restitution.
RATIONALE: “The Commission issued a determination on May 12, 1977 granting the claimant fifteen credit weeks with the employer. The employer did not protest the determination within the twenty-day protest period.
“Under these circumstances, the Board is of the opinion that restitution is not required pursuant to Section 32a(3) of the Act. Claimant did not receive the benefits as a result of non-disclosure of a material fact or administrative clerical error.”
Digest Author: Board of Review (original digest here)
Digest Updated: 11/90