Florida Statute 414.41 | Lawyer Caselaw & Research

The 2024 Florida Statutes

Title XXX
SOCIAL WELFARE

Chapter 414
FAMILY SELF-SUFFICIENCY

View Entire Chapter

F.S. 414.41

414.41 Recovery of payments made due to mistake or fraud.—

(1) Whenever it becomes apparent that any person or provider has received any public assistance under this chapter to which she or he is not entitled, through either simple mistake or fraud on the part of the department or on the part of the recipient or participant, the department shall take all necessary steps to recover the overpayment. Recovery may include Federal Income Tax Refund Offset Program collections activities in conjunction with the Food and Nutrition Service and the Internal Revenue Service to intercept income tax refunds due to clients who owe food assistance or temporary cash assistance debt to the state. The department will follow the guidelines in accordance with federal rules and regulations and consistent with the Food Assistance Program. The department may make appropriate settlements and shall establish a policy and cost-effective rules to be used in the computation and recovery of such overpayments.

(a) The department will consider an individual who has willfully provided false information or omitted information to become or remain eligible for temporary cash assistance to have committed an intentional program violation.

(b) When the intentional program violation or case facts do not warrant criminal prosecution for fraud as defined in s. 414.39, the department will initiate an administrative disqualification hearing. The administrative disqualification hearing will be initiated regardless of the individual’s current eligibility.

(c) Upon a finding through the administrative disqualification hearing process that the individual did commit an intentional program violation, the department will impose a disqualification period consistent with those established for food assistance program purposes.

(2) The department shall determine if recovery of an overpayment as a result of department error regarding cash assistance provided under the Temporary Cash Assistance Program or benefits provided to a recipient of aid to families with dependent children would create extreme hardship. The department shall provide by rule the circumstances that constitute an extreme hardship. The department may reduce the amount of repayment if a recipient or participant demonstrates to the satisfaction of the department that repayment of the entire overpayment would result in extreme hardship, but the department may not excuse repayment. A determination of extreme hardship is not grounds for a waiver of repayment in whole or in part.

(3) The department, or its designee, shall enforce an order of income deduction by the court against the liable adult recipient or participant, including the head of a family, for overpayment received as an adult under the temporary cash assistance program, the AFDC program, the food assistance program, or the Medicaid program.

History.—s. 1, ch. 69-268; ss. 19, 35, ch. 69-106; s. 1, ch. 70-255; s. 285, ch. 77-147; s. 15, ch. 78-433; s. 2, ch. 80-408; s. 4, ch. 87-377; s. 44, ch. 96-175; s. 194, ch. 96-410; s. 1038, ch. 97-103; s. 32, ch. 97-173; s. 47, ch. 2000-165; s. 13, ch. 2001-377; s. 47, ch. 2002-400; s. 31, ch. 2010-209; s. 3, ch. 2016-185.

Note.—Former s. 409.335.

F.S. 414.41 on Google Scholar

F.S. 414.41 on Casetext

Amendments to 414.41

Arrestable Offenses / Crimes under Fla. Stat. 414.41

Level: Degree
Misdemeanor/Felony: First/Second/Third

Current data shows no reason an arrest or criminal charge should have occurred directly under Florida Statute 414.41.

Annotations, Discussions, Cases:

Cases Citing Statute 414.41

Total Results: 10

Gatlin v. Department of Children & Families

Court: District Court of Appeal of Florida | Date Filed: 2011-02-09

Citation: 55 So. 3d 641, 2011 Fla. App. LEXIS 1649

Snippet: PER CURIAM. Affirmed. See § 414.41(1), Fla. Stat. (2009); Pinelli v. Dep’t of Children & Families, 878

Gatlin v. Department of Children and Families

Court: District Court of Appeal of Florida | Date Filed: 2011-02-09

Citation: 55 So. 3d 641, 2011 WL 613489

Snippet: LAGOA, and SALTER, JJ. PER CURIAM. Affirmed. See § 414.41(1), Fla. Stat. (2009); Pinelli v. Dep't of Children

Corallo v. DEPT. OF CHILDREN & FAM. SERVS.

Court: District Court of Appeal of Florida | Date Filed: 2008-01-02

Citation: 971 So. 2d 966, 2008 WL 34799

Snippet: against Ms. Corallo, pursuant to subsection *967 414.41(1) of the Florida Statutes, for failure to report

NEKHAILA v. Dept. of Children and Families

Court: District Court of Appeal of Florida | Date Filed: 2007-12-19

Citation: 971 So. 2d 927, 2007 Fla. App. LEXIS 20099, 2007 WL 4404575

Snippet: part of the Department or the recipient. See § 414.41, Fla. Stat. (2005); Payne v. Fla. Dep't of Children

Jensen v. Department of Children & Family Services

Court: District Court of Appeal of Florida | Date Filed: 2007-08-01

Citation: 962 So. 2d 983, 2007 Fla. App. LEXIS 11731

Snippet: PER CURIAM. Affirmed. § 414.41(1), Fla. Stat. (2003); see also Pinelli v. Dep’t of Children & Families

Jensen v. Department of Children and Family Services

Court: District Court of Appeal of Florida | Date Filed: 2007-08-01

Citation: 962 So. 2d 983, 2007 WL 2188162

Snippet: SUAREZ, and ROTHENBERG, JJ. PER CURIAM. Affirmed. § 414.41(1), Fla. Stat. (2003); see also Pinelli v. Dep't

Pinelli v. DEPARTMENT OF CHILDREN AND FAM.

Court: District Court of Appeal of Florida | Date Filed: 2004-08-04

Citation: 878 So. 2d 491

Snippet: necessary steps to recover the overpayment." § 414.41(1), Fla. Stat. (2002). Thus, even if the food stamp

Thomas v. State

Court: District Court of Appeal of Florida | Date Filed: 1991-08-08

Citation: 583 So. 2d 336, 1991 WL 41004

Snippet: (1925); City of Burlington v. Stockwell, 1 Kan. App. 414, 41 P. 221, 56 Kan. 208, 42 P. 826 (1895). [2] For

State, Ex Rel. Hoffman v. Powell

Court: Supreme Court of Florida | Date Filed: 1935-01-26

Citation: 159 So. 508, 118 Fla. 296

Snippet: Washingtonian Home of Chicago v. City of Chicago, 157 Ill. 414, 41 N.E. Rep. 893, 29 L.R.A. 798; Fesler v. Brayton

House v. Nash

Court: Supreme Court of Florida | Date Filed: 1925-07-08

Citation: 105 So. 266, 90 Fla. 123

Snippet: 43 South. Rep. 507; Collier v. Dasher,51 Fla. 414, 41 South. Rep. 269; Florida East Coast R. Co. v. Taylor