Kallie Cox//September 30, 2024//
The Missouri Court of Appeals, Western District reversed a decision from the Labor and Industrial Relations Commission and the Appeals Tribunal of the Division of Employment Security in the case of a man who claims his appeal was timely regarding a notice that he was overpaid unemployment benefits.
Vaughn Wattree applied for unemployment benefits for “numerous weeks” from 2020 to 2021. The Division of Employment Security approved his application. Then in December 2022, the division conducted an audit and determined Wattree had been overpaid $320.00 for four of those weeks, according to the court.
The division said Wattree’s overpayment was because he defrauded the organization by failing to properly claim income for those weeks.
“The record on appeal contains a copy of a notice of an overpayment and penalty determination that lists a mailing date of ‘12-21-22,’” the court stated.
During a hearing before the appeals tribunal, it was noted that it appeared two of these overpayment notices had been mailed to Wattree on the same day.
“Wattree disagreed that the mailing dates were correct and testified that he never received those determinations,” according to the court.
Instead, on April 11, 2023, Wattree sent a letter to the division indicating that he had received an assessment notice on March 30, 2023, according to the court.
“The letter indicated that Wattree wished to appeal because he would never intentionally do anything to hinder his receipt of benefits,” according to the court. “Wattree sent further correspondence to the division in June of 2023, indicating that he had been in correspondence with division staff. The letter indicated that Wattree first learned of the issue via the certified assessment letter that had been retrieved from the post office. Wattree indicated that he filed his appeal promptly, as soon as learning of the issue.”
Additionally, Wattree said the fraud accusations caught him off guard and that he was gathering evidence to clear his name but that this would be difficult as the alleged overpayments occurred years before the appeal. He included 40 pages of bank records with the letter.
Wattree appealed to the court after the commission and tribunal sided with the Division of Employment Security, which claimed he failed to file a timely appeal after receiving these notices.
The appeals court reversed and remanded the decision to the commission, writing in its opinion:
“The appeals tribunal found that the division mailed Wattree an overpayment by fraud determination on December 21, 2022, which started the thirty-day appeal window. However, as discussed below, this finding of the commission and the appeals tribunal — that the notice was mailed on December 21, 2022 — was not supported by competent and substantial evidence upon the whole record. Absent compliance with the notice procedures of section 288.380.9(2), Wattree’s thirty-day window to appeal could not open and certainly could not close as found by the Appeals Tribunal and the Commission. Accordingly, the Commission’s decision must be reversed.”
The court stated in its opinion that efforts should be made to ensure that the evidence Wattree previously presented to the division and the appeals tribunal be evaluated.
The case is: Vaugn Wattree v. Division of Employment Security, Case No. WD86847
This article credit to MOLawyersMedia