EDD wants their "overpayment" after 2 years..

Not open for further replies.


New Member
I am a substitute teacher and was working pretty steadily at my school district. I worked summer school, winter session for two years. In the summer of 2010, there were going to be no jobs available. I was living by myself and would not be able to afford rent with no income coming in. I applied for other schools in the district, but with the budget cuts, there were no jobs. I was forced to move to Los Angeles to stay with my mom (rent free). I applied for benefits stating what I mentioned above. Usually they send you a letter with a scheduled phone appointment to see if I qualified or not. I never received that call and was sent a check instead. I received those checks for almost two years. Just recently, I got a letter saying I was overpaid and my initial reason I gave them(see above), was not a valid one. Two things:
1. Why after two years would they send me a letter saying my reason was not a valid one?
2. Why would they send me checks for almost two years and now say they overpaid me?
Is this legal?
I appealed and received notice today that the EDD stands by their decision but they will send my appeal to an appeals court.
My question is what are the chances of them reversing their decision at the hearing? I dont know what else to tell the court that I didnt already mention in the appeal letter.
Please, any advice would be appreciated.
Doesnt seem fair to me.
Oh, it may not be fair, but it is legal.

No one ever said the law was fair, it isn't, but it is the law.

I suggest you rethink your story, it ain't working.

I won't help you concoct a new story, but you can ask around.

It usually won't help, these folks are like the IRS.

When they get a bead on you, they keep coming.

You have about a 10-20% chance of a reversal, but that's it.

They look at the fact that you took the money and never asked why.

In fact, they'll say you took it for two years,a nd never asked what the heck is this?

So, you'll likely end up with a judgment against you.

They'll slap a levy against income tax refunds, your bank account, your current and future earnings until they get their money back in FULL.

They might sometimes consider a hardship story, but since 2008, you ain't the only one that's crying that song!

Anyway, you're almost toast.

You still have a wee bit of hope.
@Armyjudge: You sound angry, about "what" I'm not really sure but this forum isn't the appropriate place to vent your personal frustrations.

@jcisneros73: You've done nothing wrong. Unfortunately, a lot of people (including myself) have been forced to relocate due to a lack of jobs in their area. The circumstances of your filing don't sound illogical at all. I see no fraud there (or anything that would have normally disqualified you from receiving those benefits in the first place). The EDD dropped the ball on this one and they are trying to reclaim the money on a technicality. You are expected to follow their directions and be honest with the information you provide BUT are NOT expected to make sure their employees are doing their job (or to understand what their internal systems processes are). Get a lawyer! And fast! If you get a decent one, the EDD almost certainly has no grounds for winning their case. You can easily argue that you had no clue that NOT being called for an interview was just an oversight on their part (really, who would? we expect them to know how to do their job). You also sound like you have grounds for claiming you are unable to pay due to financial hardship. Bottom line: it's not as gloom and doom as old angry "army judge" up there is trying to scare you into believing. Please post an update on your situation if possible. Would love to know how it all worked out for you.
1. Army Judge was actually being commendably restrained.
2. OP was not laid off or terminated, instead, OP had a job where they had no stable means of support and likely did not work for a single employer daily, under an employment contract, long enough to qualify for UI benefits. OP was essentially a day laborer.
Not open for further replies.