Browse cases by category
- Attorneys & Legal Services
- Bankruptcy
- Civil Procedure & Administrative Law
- Civil Rights
- Consumer
- Criminal
- Disability
- Economic Development
- Education
- Elections
- Employment
- Environmental Justice
- Evidence
- Family Law
- Food Programs
- Government and Governmental Services
- Guardianship & Conservatorship
- Health
- Housing
- Immigration
- Juveniles
- License (Auto & Others)
- Mental Health
- Migrants
- Native Americans
- Other
- Prisons
- Public Utilities & Energy
- Rural Issues
- Senior Citizens
- Social Security & SSI
- Taxation
- Torts
- Unemployment Compensation & Unemployment Insurance
- Veterans & Military
- Welfare
- Wills & Estates
- Workforce Development
Brenda C., In re
No. 95-SHCO-218 ( Ohio Dep’t of Human Serv. May 30, 1995) ; Clearinghouse Number: 50737
Description
Child Support Enforcement Agency May Not Collect Pass-Through Paid to AFDC Recipient in Error
Abstract
The administrative hearing examiner has reversed the Ohio
Department of Human Services’ finding that claimant is liable
for an overpayment of child support. Claimant is an AFDC recipient
entitled to, but not receiving, child support. She and another
woman in the county who is also entitled to child support have
identical names. Through agency error, claimant received the other
woman’s $50 child support pass-through for five months. After
the child support enforcement agency discovered the error, it
attempted to recoup the money from claimant. Objecting to the
recoupment, claimant argued that the notice of overpayment was
improper because it referred to direct payments of support that she
did not receive. Claimant also argued that she should be exempt
from recoupment because she did not cause the overpayment. The
administrative hearing examiner found that, because claimant had
not been actually receiving child support, the $250 overpayment she
had received was not a IV-D overpayment. Therefore, the hearing
examiner held that the county department of human services, rather
than the child support enforcement agency, should have issued the
overpayment notice to claimant. Because of this error, the hearing
examiner reversed the agency’s decision and directed the
child support enforcement agency to cease all efforts to collect
the amount incorrectly identified as a IV-D overpayment.
