Deklinski v. UCBR - February 23, 2012 - Cmwlth. Court
http://www.pacourts.us/OpPosting/Cwealth/out/1379CD11_2-23-12.pdf
Claimant here does not merely argue that the overpayment was not her fault. Claimant also argues that repayment would be against equity and good conscience because it would cause her financial hardship, a claim not made in Stelter v. UCBR, 14 A.3d 929 (Pa. Cmwlth. 2011), and she presented evidence to support this claim at the hearing. This court has recognized financial hardship as a basis for a waiver request. See, e.g., Grunwald v. UCBR, 829 A.2d 786, 788 (Pa. Cmwlth. 2003).
Although Claimant raised the financial hardship claim before the referee and in her appeal to the UCBR, the UCBR failed to address it. Accordingly, we vacate the UCBR’s order and remand for findings of fact and conclusions of law on the issue of whether repayment of the EUC overpayment would cause Claimant financial hardship.
Title IV of the Supplemental Appropriation Act of 2008, P.L. 110-252, 122 Stat. 2353, Section 4005(b), 26 U.S.C. §3304 Note. Section 4005(b) of the Act provides: In the case of individuals who have received amounts of [EUC] under this title to which they were not entitled, the State shall require such individuals to repay the amounts of such [EUC] to the State agency, except that the State agency may waive such repayment if it determines that – (1) the payment of such [EUC] was without fault on the part of any such individual; and (2) such repayment would be contrary to equity and good conscience. 26 U.S.C. §3304 Note.
