My mom's friend retired last year, and is collecting unemployment, "Because she deserves it"

[tridim]

Not only is she retired, but she also just inherited 2 million dollars from her family's estate. :mad:

And yes, she's a rabid Kansas Republican.

As a real unemployed person this has me fuming. I don't think I've ever heard anything so immoral.

I'm about 10 minutes from calling her unemployment office and reporting her for fraud. Can anyone think of one reason why I shouldn't?

[piratefish08]

1. do it

[elleng]

No. Do it.

Others in Kansas, who REALLY need it, may need the funds she's receiving.

[marmar]

2. Wingnut Welfare Queen

nt

[dbonds]

3. Hope those 10 minutes go by fast because no reason you shouldn't do it.

[alittlelark]

4. Do it. That $ should go to those who NEED it.

[ThatsMyBarack]

109. I agree.

DO IT NOW!!!

[Ozymanithrax]

5. Is it legal to collect unemployment and retirement.

I mean, there is nothing you can do about the 2 million. But I was under the impression that retiring isn't the same thing as going on unemployment.

Fortunatly, unemployment isn't forever and the benefits run out sooner or later.

But if the law is beign broken, put it a report. It is your duty as a citizen.

[PA Democrat]

24. The only way I can think that this would be legal is if the company

asked for volunteers to be laid off. When my former employer had a big layoff they offered people a package to take early retirement, including allowing them to a lump sum or severance pay. Depending upon the state, they can usually collect unemployment after the severance pay runs out.

[Ozymanithrax]

30. But unemployment allso usually stipulates that you are looking for work.

Fortunatly, it isn't forever, and this Republican is just being a socialist.

[PA Democrat]

42. No argument here.

Unfortunately, it's easy to pretend you are actively looking for work and the state lacks the resources to verify whether it's true.

I would hold the info in my back pocket for every time that person complained about socialism to remind them of their hypocrisy.

[undeterred]

101. The state recommends that you keep a record of jobs applied to.

I've been collecting unemployment for several months, and every week I certify that I have applied to at least two jobs. If they wanted to investigate, I would have to divulge the names of the companies and jobs I've applied to for a given week. If I was unable to do so, they would have every right to take the payment back. They don't have the resources to check up on every person, but if they wanted to check up on someone who is not following the rules, they'd do it.

[Cal Carpenter]

57. No, a socialist would only take 'according to his/her need', not greed

eom

[proud2BlibKansan]

41. Not in Kansas it isn't

You have to be looking for work. Collecting a pension means you are retired.

I know this because DH is worried about being laid off and has made some inquiries.

[shimmergal]

92. I don't THINK it is legal to

collect unemployment if you're getting social security (although this might vary by state) but if she's not drawing SS yet, the situation may be a little more complicated. If her "retirement income " is basically from her own savings, it may be OK.

[Fla Dem]

108. If the retirement is from a different employment, I don't see a problem with that.

A lot of retirees collecting a retirement benefit cannot survive on that alone, so they work a different job after retiring. If that job is terminated, they should be entitled to collect unemployment. If her employer has paid into the state unemployment fund she is due unemployment. As far as I know there in no "means" testing for unemployment compensation.

If she is collecting unemployment from the same job as she "retired" from, there may be extenuating circumstances. If she was forced to retire; an involuntary retirement, I would think she would be entitled to UC.

[LeftyMom]

6. Did she retire or was she fired/laid off?

If the former, she shouldn't have qualified for unemployment, and her prior employer should have filed a dispute. If the latter, as long as she's looking for work she qualifies.

Unemployment isn't means tested. If she meets the criteria and she paid in she's entitled to it, no matter what other money she has from her inheritance, because it's an insurance program and she paid in.

[tridim]

17. My mom said she retired and has no intention of working again.

That said, I'm sure she's pretending to look for a job for her little scam.

That's why I asked for opinions here. I'm not sure if what she's doing is technically illegal, just incredibly immoral.

However, if she is on the federal UI benefit extension, she did NOT pay into that.

[Warpy]

18. Exactly, it's insurance and she paid the premiums

so if she was laid off or fired without cause, she has no reason to collect. If she does have a valid reason, then let her. It's like expecting people who inherited money to pay for their own car repairs or hospitalization just because other people on the same insurance plans need it more.

If that two million was well invested, she should be seeing $75,000/year in income. While that's a good retirement income, it's far from princely.

I would grumble if the platinum parachute CEO who was canned for incompetence tried to collect unemployment on top of a Sultan's severance because he'd have been fired with cause.

If she fits the requirements, she's owed the benefits and that's the bottom line.

[LeftyMom]

31. She may be presenting herself as retired because she knows her chances of finding work are low.

Sort of like people who become "self-employed" or "consultants" when they really mean unemployed or underemployed.

[havocmom]

32. um, isn't it employers who pay (at least the bulk of) unemployment premiums?

If she was just pissed at her boss, she might think she's entitled, but if she retired, that money is not hers, it should stay in 'the kitty' to pay benefits for people who actually lost their jobs.

Unemployment is not like Social Security.

[sinkingfeeling]

35. It is 100% true in Kansas.

Who pays for unemployment benefits?

The Kansas Employment Security Law requires employers to pay all eligible unemployment benefits.
https://www.uibenefits.dol.ks.gov/HelpGen.asp

[Warpy]

36. It is but there is an employee contribution

and you'd better believe that every dime an employer pays for an employee is one dime that employee will never see in wages.

She might not have the intention of working again but circumstances could force her to in the future.

[tosh]

50. What state does that?

I have never heard of an employee contribution to state unemployment tax.

[havocmom]

51. Me neither. Have lived in 4 different states. In none of them do employees pay any of it

It is an employer cost. And, yes, it is considered as an employee cost, in that employers pay a rate for each employee, so that means less they can pay the workers, but the employer is responsible for paying the premium.

Everywhere I have lived, employers' rates are raised based on how many of their employees have to claim unemployment benefits. That is done as an attempt to keep workers working (and paying THEIR taxes) and the economy humming. As bad as layoffs and outsourcing is, one might guess unemployment might be a lot worse as employers would be faced with increasing rates for capricious job reductions.

[DURHAM D]

54. Me neither.

However, most employees are under the impression that they are kicking into the fund.

As an "employer" I can testify to the fact that I make the entire contribution - not my employees.

[havocmom]

53. Yes, the $ EMPLOYERS pay into the insurance unfund is $ not going to workers

but it is the employers who pay, at least everywhere I have ever heard about it.

Perhaps DUers from different states could look at their pay stubs and report back if they have money actually withheld from pay checks for the premiums for unemployment insurance.

Could be that in some states, 'independent contractors' have to pay something, and yes, there are more employers trying to find ways to make employees 'independent contractors'. The reason for that? They don't have to pay certain taxes and fees, like unemployment insurance premiums and the employer share of Social Security.

[closeupready]

72. They pay the premium on your behalf.

So technically, YOU are paying into unemployment.

[daleanime]

45. I hate to ask but...

if $75,000/year is far from princely, what's princely? Guess my family really is the working poor.

[FBaggins]

75. There's a massive gap between "working poor" and "princely"

That gap (the "middle class") may include fewer PEOPLE than it used to, but the dollar range is huge.

It's a common perception (though false) that "rich" means "people who make more than me" and "poor" means "people who make less than me".

You can BE "working poor" even at the $75k level if you live in a high cost-of-living state... you can also be quite comfortable in other areas.

"Princely" really is quite a bit higher than that... certainly for the vast majority of the country.

OTOH, 75k is pretty conservative for a retired person with over $2 million. Reasonably invested and taking withdrawals intended to spend the principal over her remaining life expectancy... she might get twice that much.

[daleanime]

77. Reminds me of an agruement...

I had with a professors wife at a college function, she was convinced that her and her husband were solidly middle class in spite of an combined income of over 150,000/year. Her reasoning being that the family was have a hard time putting it's two sons through college-one in Cornell, the other in Harvard.

[FBaggins]

79. You don't become middle class by spending everything you make

That's just nuts... but not what I was talking about.

If they lived in NY city (or similar)... they WERE solidly middle class.

Not in any danger of dropping OUT of the middle class, you understand... but certainly IN it.

The classic example of a policewoman married to a teacher fits. That coupld could very well make 150k in an expensive area... and still be very "middle class". And they would be "behind" you making 75k if you lived in rural GA

edit - I see that you live in Bath (nice area... we have friends near there). City-data tells me that the median household income there is about 35k and you can buy a decent home for 100k. 75k would make for a pretty comfortable lifestyle (though still not "princely")... but there are areas in the state where a family couldn't possibly live a middle-class at 75k.

[yellowcanine]

98. Um, it is not a true insurance program. States regularly put in general treasury dollars.

In fact, some of the stimulus dollars went to subsidizing unemployment payments. If it were a true insurance program they would not have to do that.

Secondly if a person has earned income from other sources, such as a temporary job, their unemployment check is decreased correspondingly. I don't know about inheritances or other windfalls but it seems that there should be an adjustment for that if there is not.

[Donnachaidh]

7. if she's retired she should NOT be able to collect unemployment

Turn her ass in.

[Ian David]

Find out if you get a reward for turning her in, too. n/t

[Donnachaidh]

19. oh snap LOL!

that's COLD! :rofl:

[Warpy]

38. Theoretically she needs to go on job interviews to qualify

but as someone who survived the 1974 Nixon mess, I can confirm that in really bad job markets, they don't bother to ask. Just sign your name and pick up the check.

Now if she's also collecting Social Security, there might be a problem.

[tammywammy]

43. I collected for 3 weeks back in July 2009

The problem was I was laid off from my job on June 30, but received a job offer on July 1. Seriously lucky I know. Anywho, due to security & background checks I wasn't starting my job until the 27th of July. I was technically supposed to be looking for a job, but I didn't. Since I didn't have something in writing and the fact that it was dependant upon receiving my security clearance (which wasn't an issue) I was still "unemployed" and supposed to make 3 contacts a week. I said I made them, but I didn't actually do anything for three weeks.

I knew since I was only going to collect for a few weeks it was highly unlikely they'd audit me anyways.

[Donnachaidh]

56. even in this market, they ask here (Atlanta area)

I've yet to hear from anyone who is out of work who has said they don't need to look because they are not asked.

[Warpy]

78. Back in Boston in 1974 the line would stretch a couple of blocks

every night of the week when we were assigned to pick up our checks. They didn't ask us. Not only were there no jobs, if they didn't want to be there until the wee hours, they didn't do anything but point at the sig line and hand us the checks.

[Ian David]

8. She can only collect unemployment if she's actually looking for work.

Also, I'm pretty sure (in Massachusetts, anyway) that if you quit your job, you cannot collect unemployment.

Retiring is probably the same as quitting.

[JitterbugPerfume]

9. do it

You will feel better , and you will have done a public service.

[FBaggins]

10. I can think of a few good reasons why you SHOULD report her

1) It's illegal and therefore should be reported.

2) There's only so much money in the world (shh... don't tell the Fed) and if she gets it then someone else who actually needs it can't.

3) IN some cases, YOU get a cut of any money you save the government (sometimes a substantial one). I don't know it it applies to Social Security, but I know it applies to taxes. If she's lying here then she's likely lying about those millions as well.

IOW... it's the right thing to do AND you could profit from it.

If you DO get a payout for reporting the fraud. Don't forget my finder's fee should be donated to DU. :-)

[Mudoria]

11. I think you need more info before you turn her in..

If it turns out as you say in the OP then you need to turn her in.

[Dappleganger]

12. I know someone who shut his business down

in Massachusetts (a small manufacturing company), laid off everyone including himself and is collecting uemployment still after a year. This guy has tons of money and is a big republican, but claims he's milking the system for all its worth just because he can and thinks he deserves it. The people he laid off had been there more than 20 years and are in real dire straights, too. Fuck him.

[NYC_SKP]

13. It's your DUTY to report her.

Fuck that shit, turn her ass in.

Not that they'll do anything about it, but you've got to try.

[earth mom]

14. Go for it! nt

[RaleighNCDUer]

15. If she is, if fact, retired then she IS collecting unemployment fraudulently.

If she accepted early retirement, which includes retirement benefits, but claimed that she was canned, it is fraud.

There are plenty of people who are genuinely unemployed who need those benefits.

EDIT: I can think of ONE circumstance where she might collect unemployment and retirement benefits at the same time - it could conceivably happen to me. I've worked for the state for going on 20 years, and will soon be eligible to retire from the state job. Retiring from that job would enable me to increase my hours at my P/T job, where I would continue to work. That job goes under because of the economy - I start getting unemployment for that job, while still collecting retirement from the state job.

If she retired from a different job than the one she is getting unemployment from, she could be eligible.

[Fire_Medic_Dave]

16. Sounds like a perfectly reasonable thing to do.

[cmd]

20. You absolutely should report it

If you don't, you are guilty of covering for her. Do it now.

[no limit]

21. I would guess you really don't have all the information and are making a lot of assumptions

they don't just hand out unemployment benfeits to every joe blow that walks in and asks for it (as far as I know).

[tridim]

34. You're right, I don't have all the information.

I don't talk to her, nor do I talk to anyone in her family, so there's really no way to know for sure.

My Mom was upset enough to tell me about it, so it must be bad. My parents are the most honest people I know (except when it comes to politcs, but that's another story).

I'll file a report, and if she's not hiding anything there should be no problem.

[T Wolf]

22. DEFINITELY dime her out. SHits like her deserve to rot in jail. nt

[Xithras]

25. They don't send you to jail for UI fraud...

...they just make you pay it all back (though jailtime could be in your future if you refuse).

[sinkingfeeling]

23. Please call. Of course, I wonder about an unemployment agency that wouldn't verify the

unemployment claim to avoid fraud.

[Cleita]

26. It is insurance even though it's through the government. You do pay into

it when you are working so why not collect when you aren't working? I agree she should be looking for work and she may just be doing so. Just because her friend says otherwise doesn't necessarily make it true. That is the contract. However, think about life insurance. Should you not collect as a beneficiary when someone dies who named you on their policy? It seems major corporations do it all the time, take life insurance on their employees and then collect when they die? Now I think that should be illegal and is immoral.

[sinkingfeeling]

33. Employees do not pay into state unemployment insurance funds in the majority of states, including

Kansas. The employer pays.

https://www.uibenefits.dol.ks.gov/HelpGen.asp


Who pays for unemployment benefits?

The Kansas Employment Security Law requires employers to pay all eligible unemployment benefits.

[Cleita]

37. They do in California, but even if the employer pays, it's still insurance.

I mean if your employer pays for your health insurance, are you not supposed to use it?

[sinkingfeeling]

47. Insurance fraud is insurance fraud, no matter who pays for it or what it's for.

[Cleita]

59. I never said otherwise. What is your point?

[Sanity Claws]

27. Do it

In order to collect unemployment, she has to be looking for another job. If she isn't (you said she's retired), then she's not eligible. Simple as that. In fact, if she's collecting, she's probably lying under oath or affirmation every two weeks and claiming that she is looking for work.
That's perjury.

[napi21]

28. Did she retire or was she terminated (for whatever reason)?

If her job was eliminated or something other than "for cause", she's eligible for unemployment. You & I may find that horrible, but that's the law. Believe it or not, the Chairman of Golman Saks could collect unemployment if he were terminated. The diff. is that someone receiving unemployment comp. and is also wealthy also has to pay income tax on the unemployment.

[ORDagnabbit]

29. do it

[proud2BlibKansan]

39. Why is it fraud?

I live in KS and it's pretty hard to game the system here. So I would suspect she is eligible for unemployment or she wouldn't be getting it.

I also know you can't collect unemployment and a pension at the same time.

[tridim]

40. I'm going to file a report..

And tell them exactly what I told DU.

I'm not going to accuse her of fraud, but just ask that they investigate based on the limited information I have.

I can tell this is one of those things that is going to bug the hell out of me 24/7 unless I do something.

[unblock]

44. kansas requires unemployment claimants to make several job contacts each week

if she's not doing that, it's fraud.

she's committing a crime.

*IF* you want to bend out of deferrence to your mother and your mother wants to remain friends with this scumbag, then you might want to consider giving the criminal a heads-up so she can return every ill-gotten dime before you notify the authorities.

[otohara]

46. That's Just Wrong

and if it really is fraud, then I say go for it.

[prolesunited]

48. Some companies will take volunteers for layoffs

and not contest your unemployment. HOWEVER, if you received any type of severance package, you are supposed to report it. It is pro-rated based on your previous wages. You can file for unemployment, but they will not give you checks until your severance/vacation package is expired.

For example, if you get four weeks severance and one week vacation, you wouldn't be eligible for a check until seven weeks in -- five weeks for your package and the one week waiting period.

If she did not report her severance package and is also collecting checks, she is double dipping and committing fraud. If she says she is searching for work and reporting bogus work searches, she is committing fraud.

But, she won't end up in jail. The will investigate and she will have to pay the money back, likely along with penalties and court fees.

[road2000]

88. This is not entirely true.

I was part of a mass layoff at the end of October, and am now near the end of my 14 weeks severance pay (based on years worked). However, I have collected unemployment since November 1.

How? Per the company's written suggestion, I took the papers to an attorney before signing them. He inserted a clause that any severance pay is allocated back to the time one was employed; in other words, I earned the severance before the layoff, and it is not considered "pay." One of the company's attorneys said this was correct, but she thought it would be "understood" that layoffs qualified from first day of unemployment. She inserted the clause. There was a question over eligibility, and Ohio's unemployment authorities found in my favor, thanks to that clause. I have to wonder what happened to my fellow 125 layoffs who just went ahead and signed.

To the OP: I would pin down the facts and report the woman if she's cheating. Too many of us out here have been working all our lives (in my case, 40 years and am still two years away from early retirement). Among my circle of laid-off acquaintances, we all assiduously apply for as many jobs as possible per week, and we keep records. We all want to work, and none of us has "Great Expectations."

[rd_kent]

49. Why havent you already made the call?

[LiberalFighter]

52. If you have the facts correct a letter to the editor might be in order.

Or talk to your local station person or newspaper that handles that type of investigation.

[RubyDuby in GA]

55. Do it and then call your local media to have them ask her why she thinks she is entitled to it.

Go for it.

[Matariki]

58. Focus on your own life and not hatred of someone else's.

Since you asked for random internet advice.

How is it fraud? Inheriting money doesn't preclude a person from collecting unemployment if they've been laid off. Is she retired because she lost a job close to retirement age?

Aren't you concerned about hurting your relationship with your mom by trying to 'inform' on one of her friends?

[tridim]

62. It has nothing to do with my Mom.

My Mom didn't do anything wrong. I love my Mom and she loves me, and she cetainly wouldn't have given me this information if it didn't bother her as well. My parents are both hyper-honest.

Her "friend" is a piece of shit, always has been.

[Name removed]

60. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[Name removed]

63. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[arthritisR_US]

61. absof*ckinglutely do it! n/t

[Zywiec]

64. Yes, please report her and do your part for the homeland. n/t

[postulater]

65. She is screwing her ex-employer.

Most states require the worker to be actively looking for work.

If she is not actively looking they can stop paying her and get her to pay back what she has received.

[Tailormyst]

66. You are hearing the details through a third person

She might be just saying she is retired because its very tough to find a job that close to retirement age. This might be a time where it is best to MYOB. Your actions could have unintended consequences.

[tridim]

71. It upset my Mom enough that she felt it necessary to tell me about it.

I'm thinking my Mom subconciously wants me to report her so she doesn't have to rat out her friend, but she never directly asked me to.

She made it clear that her friend has no intention of ever working again. She's filthy rich and Republican, why would she work?

[Tailormyst]

73. Then let your mom be the one to call.

Otherwise you risk damaging your relationship with your mother.

[tridim]

74. No, I'm not worried about that at all.

I've already written the letter. Made no accusations, just a head's up that they might want to check on her.

[Maru Kitteh]

67. MAKE - THE - CALL. It's the right thing to do.

[raccoon]

68. No, I can't. Go ahead! nt

[closeupready]

69. This is disgusting - I don't know what I'd do.

As someone else mentioned, I don't know all the facts of her case, so there is no way for me to know for sure that she is doing something wrong - it sure sounds funny. But I also dislike the idea of being a snitch, as it would seem disloyal (in this case) to my mom.

[HillbillyBob]

70. It IS fraud

My Aunt lives in Topeka and lost her job, her unemployment has run out. She is also sick and has remortgaged her home which she worked 2 and 3 jobs to get paid off is in her early 60s and cannot collect SSD Not sick and broke enough!? survived open heart surgery and cancer, barely) and is a few years from SS.
She could sure use some help.

[tridim]

76. Just talked to my Mom again and she said she doesn't mind if I report her

And wouldn't be upset with me if I do.

I called her a "welfare queen" and she agreed. Quite an admission for a typical Kansas Conservative.

[Rebubula]

80. Absolutely....

...it is our responsibility to turn in our neighbors and friends to the authorities based on hearsay from a relative. The Homeland requires it.

:sarcasm:


I guess that I should not tell you that I smoke pot...

[tridim]

81. My Mom's friend is proud of what she's doing.

And my Mom is just as upset as I am.

Take your Homeland crap and shove it.

[Rebubula]

82. Hey...

...you are the one looking for feel good affirmation for turning someone in based on the stories from someone else.


If you feel a need to stir up shit where you have no business being (your mom being upset does not equate to this being your business) then feel free.

Where does it stop, though?

[Name removed]

83. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[Rebubula]

84. Ignored or not....

...you posed a question and I took you to task and now I am ignored. Awesome.

I simply asked you a question about your actions, motives and involvement. You do not even know if your mom has the whole story and you are willing to make trouble for someone. Yeah....maybe she is not doing anything wrong, but you are going to make her defend herself anyway - - that is a pain in the ass and can be legally expensive.

Go on and feel proud of yourself. Your responses to negative feedback are rather immature.

But....you never read this....

[Iowa]

103. That post you responded to was hostile in tone. But consider this...

It sounds like you've already decided, but just for the sake of discussion, I can see a lot of reasons why I would want to nail that gal receiving unemployment benefits. I get what you're saying. And I feel the same way.

But I'm afraid I must disagree with almost everyone who posted on this thread. I wouldn't do it.

When I consider the big picture, it comes down to what kind of a society I want to live in. In other words, which is worse... a society where some right-wing scumbag scams the unemployment system, brags about it, and gets by with it - or a society of snitches where citizens are encouraged to rat each other out by serving as the "eyes and ears" of the government? I don't much like either prospect, but considering our society's movement toward a corporatist police state, I could not in good conscience participate in the latter as a matter of principle.

I might call her out and humiliate her, or something along those lines if the opportunity presented itself. But this business of one neighbor snitching to the government about another is something I wouldn't get into. It will be one damned ugly world if that kind of thing ever gets rolling. Just as an aside, there's also something kind of tawdry and low-class about snitching on a friend/neighbor/acquaintance... it reminds me of that TV show "COPS". If you have ever channel-surfed and spent two minutes watching that crappy show, you know what what I mean. That's the kind of folks I visualize when I think of people who snitch on each other. So while that's not the most important consideration, it does add to the "don't-do-it" side of the ledger.

So for those reasons, I'd let this one go. For me there would be a higher principle involved that I wouldn't want to compromise. I wouldn't do it.

[Nye Bevan]

85. Is it the $2mm inheritance that makes you want to report her?

How about if she had inherited $250,000? Would you still report her? How about $50,000?

And what if she hadn't inherited anything, but you saw her driving a Lexus? Would you turn her in?

Since you seem to be so eager to help out the authorities, you may also want to check that she is paying the taxes for any domestic help she has hired. Interview her cleaning lady and her gardener. Oh, and check out her car's inspection sticker and report her to the DMV if it is out of date.

After this criminal has been dealt with then you can start investigating the rest of your mom's friends.

[tridim]

86. No, she's taking advantage of a system set up as a safety net for people who NEED it.

She knows this, and she is proudly fucking her fellow Americans who are BROKE by no fault of their own.

I call out people like that ALL THE TIME, and I'm certainly not going to stop because you don't give a shit about honesty and decency.

[Nye Bevan]

87. So you're OK if the admins of DU send a list of all the DUers who have mentioned smoking pot

to the relevant law-enforcement authorities, along with identifying information? After all, the war on drugs costs the country much more than unemployment fraud.

[tridim]

90. You aren't even worthy of a response.

plonk.

[Nye Bevan]

96. On June 24, 2008, you made a post on DU advocating illegal drug use.

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=218&topic_id=3368&mesg_id=3371



I feel duty-bound to report you to the police. Or at least to tell your Mom's friend about it, so she can agree not to tell on you if you don't tell on her.

Plonk.

[terryg11]

89. how does she collect it without lying?

Unless the qualifications are different there can't imagine she legally qualifies for unemployment

[tridim]

91. I don't know, that's why I'm sending them a letter.

[Nye Bevan]

93. Unemployment benefits are *not* means-tested

http://www.tax.com/taxcom/taxblog.nsf/Permalink/MSUN-7YAHXY?OpenDocument

The OP will need to follow her Mom's friend around for a few weeks with a video camera to prove that she is not really looking for work. And it sounds like he is perfectly willing to do this.

[lumberjack_jeff]

94. If she is not seeking employment in good faith, then yes I'd call the UE office.

I think that a 100% tax on unemployment benefits given to people with more than $100,000 in agi is a good idea.

[undeterred]

95. Is she meeting the state requirements

which usually include applying for 2 jobs a week? I don't think the inheritance makes her ineligible. So while it may seem unfair, she isn't breaking any laws unless she is failing to do her job search.

Right now the states are very concerned about running out of unemployment money, so they would probably want to hear about someone who isn't playing by the rules.

[Nye Bevan]

97. Even if she isn't technically breaking the law, the OP is determined to bring this lady down.

I can kind of see how Ann Frank ended up getting denounced.

[eridani]

99. Makes me feel like a sap. When I took early retirement due to downsizing--

--I was eligible, but I figured people in their family-raising years needed it more.

[proud patriot]

100. nope

[donheld]

102. Without hesitation

[TexasObserver]

104. Unemployment is earned by payments and met by conditions. Are the conditions met or not?

It may be possible that the woman in question was able to get herself fired or laid off, but it seems more likely to me that she got fired, THEN inherited money. The fact that she has wealth would not negate her right to draw unemployment, by itself. It's not fraud unless the lady is claiming to be unemployed when she isn't, or otherwise unqualified to draw those sums.

I would be very cautious about getting in the middle of this based upon hearsay and indignation. Falsely reporting someone as a fraud is probably a crime itself, and could certainly result in you being sued civilly by this newly wealthy lady.

[Sisaruus]

105. I'm retired and I work full-time

I was forced into early retirement at age 55. My company merged and I was out - fortunately I was eligible for an early retirement incentive package based on age and years of service. Now, at age 57, I actually receive a small pension. I also work full-time at a new job. My pension check is (only) $1,000 a month which is less than my mortgage payment.

I'm too young to collect social security. Please tell me that if I lost my current job that I would be eligible for unemployment.

[Darth_Kitten]

106. Do it.

Seriously, there is no reason not to. That's disgusting! :(

[Dappleganger]

107. Tell them, let the authorities decide the legalities of it all.