Indiana agencies team up to battle unemployment fraud

Back to TopCommentsE-mailPrintBookmark and Share

The Marion County prosecutor's office is teaming with the Indiana Department of Workforce Development to prosecute people suspected of committing unemployment insurance fraud in Indiana.

The two agencies announced the partnership Monday, saying working together should make it easier for the state to investigate those who receive unemployment benefits but aren't entitled to them.

The state will compare unemployment benefit data to a directory of new hires to catch those abusing the system, such as those collecting unemployment benefits after they find work. One deputy prosecutor will deal exclusively with these cases, and the agency will work with the Department of Workforce Development to investigate.

"Any sort of abuse of the system deprives those who are approaching the system in an honest and truthful way," said Marion County Prosecutor Terry Curry.

The Department of Workforce Development estimates that fraudulent unemployment claims amounted to $13.1 million in Indiana in 2012.

"Every penny counts," said Department of Workforce Development Commissioner Scott Sanders. "I think it's key that we continue to go after these funds."

Marion County has jurisdiction over all such cases in the state because the workforce development department's server for filing for benefits online is in Indianapolis. Other counties will still have the authority to charge individuals they suspect of committing fraud.

"There are prosecutor's offices around the state that would not have the resources or the manpower to approach these types of cases," Curry said. "If that is the case, we can exercise jurisdiction here (in Marion County)."

Officials said they hope this effort will deter people from committing unemployment fraud. Four people were charged on Friday under the new partnership, and others are under investigation.


  • what about UI TAX fraud
    As an UI Tax Examiner I discovered that, without doubt, a Bedford employer was criminally evading UI TAXES. My audit wsa terminated because the man was a friend of the Director of the UI agentcy (and Gov. Bowen's campaign director). NO employer had been prosecuted since 1938 when UI was instituted (except perhaps one) while the Ind. Empl. Sec. Div. had a large BENEFITS fraud unit!

Post a comment to this story

We reserve the right to remove any post that we feel is obscene, profane, vulgar, racist, sexually explicit, abusive, or hateful.
You are legally responsible for what you post and your anonymity is not guaranteed.
Posts that insult, defame, threaten, harass or abuse other readers or people mentioned in IBJ editorial content are also subject to removal. Please respect the privacy of individuals and refrain from posting personal information.
No solicitations, spamming or advertisements are allowed. Readers may post links to other informational websites that are relevant to the topic at hand, but please do not link to objectionable material.
We may remove messages that are unrelated to the topic, encourage illegal activity, use all capital letters or are unreadable.

Messages that are flagged by readers as objectionable will be reviewed and may or may not be removed. Please do not flag a post simply because you disagree with it.

Sponsored by

facebook - twitter on Facebook & Twitter

Follow on TwitterFollow IBJ on Facebook:
Follow on TwitterFollow IBJ's Tweets on these topics:
Subscribe to IBJ
  1. By Mr. Lee's own admission, he basically ran pro-bono ads on the billboard. Paying advertisers didn't want ads on a controversial, ugly billboard that turned off customers. At least one of Mr. Lee's free advertisers dropped out early because they found that Mr. Lee's advertising was having negative impact. So Mr. Lee is disingenous to say the city now owes him for lost revenue. Mr. Lee quickly realized his monstrosity had a dim future and is trying to get the city to bail him out. And that's why the billboard came down so quickly.

  2. Merchants Square is back. The small strip center to the south of 116th is 100% leased, McAlister’s is doing well in the outlot building. The former O’Charleys is leased but is going through permitting with the State and the town of Carmel. Mac Grill is closing all of their Indy locations (not just Merchants) and this will allow for a new restaurant concept to backfill both of their locations. As for the north side of 116th a new dinner movie theater and brewery is under construction to fill most of the vacancy left by Hobby Lobby and Old Navy.

  3. Yes it does have an ethics commission which enforce the law which prohibits 12 specific items. google it

  4. Thanks for reading and replying. If you want to see the differentiation for research, speaking and consulting, check out the spreadsheet I linked to at the bottom of the post; it is broken out exactly that way. I can only include so much detail in a blog post before it becomes something other than a blog post.

  5. 1. There is no allegation of corruption, Marty, to imply otherwise if false. 2. Is the "State Rule" a law? I suspect not. 3. Is Mr. Woodruff obligated via an employment agreement (contractual obligation) to not work with the engineering firm? 4. In many states a right to earn a living will trump non-competes and other contractual obligations, does Mr. Woodruff's personal right to earn a living trump any contractual obligations that might or might not be out there. 5. Lawyers in state government routinely go work for law firms they were formally working with in their regulatory actions. You can see a steady stream to firms like B&D from state government. It would be interesting for IBJ to do a review of current lawyers and find out how their past decisions affected the law firms clients. Since there is a buffer between regulated company and the regulator working for a law firm technically is not in violation of ethics but you have to wonder if decisions were made in favor of certain firms and quid pro quo jobs resulted. Start with the DOI in this review. Very interesting.