NEW: RI ACLU Files Retraining Order Against Dept. of Human Services Over Food Stamp Lawsuit

NEW: RI ACLU Files Retraining Order Against Dept. of Human Services Over Food Stamp Lawsuit

The ACLU of Rhode Island has filed for a restraining order against the Department of Human Services (DHS) for its “continued use of procedurally deficient notices that have demanded SNAP recipients reimburse the state for overpayments that they purportedly received years earlier.”

Read the Restraining Order Here 

The restraining order comes a week after the ACLU filed a lawsuit against the DHS in relation to the state’s UHIP computer system and the notices being sent out. 

The Restraining Order

GET THE LATEST BREAKING NEWS HERE -- SIGN UP FOR GOLOCAL FREE DAILY EBLAST

According to the ACLU, the order temporarily bars the state from issuing any more of the demand letters based on agency or household errors, and further bars DHS from processing any SNAP benefit reductions for individuals who have already received the notices.

The order also puts on hold any pending administrative appeals filed by recipients contesting the overpayment determinations.

DHS is also required in the next month to notify all households that received the deficient letter of the terms of the restraining order. 

Finally, the order indicates that a hearing on a preliminary injunction against the agency’s practice will be scheduled before January 14, when the restraining order would otherwise expire.

The Lawsuit

As GoLocalProv reported, the plaintiff, Woonsocket resident Carmen Correa, receives SNAP benefits for herself and her 13-year-old niece.

Read the Lawsuit Here 

She recently received a notice from DHS demanding that she repay $1,925 in benefits that the agency claims were allegedly overpaid to her more than four years ago.

The only explanation given was that the overpayment was due to “Agency Error.”

While the notice advised Correa of her right to a hearing to contest DHS’s determination, the lawsuit argues that it “does not contain sufficient information to allow a reader to determine whether the overissuance is correct or whether Plaintiff has grounds to contest it.” 

The Department’s efforts to recoup alleged overpayments were halted a few years ago as a result of the enormous problems of inaccuracy and untimeliness with benefits that occurred in 2016 when UHIP went online.

The ACLU filed a class-action lawsuit that year challenging the UHIP system’s systemic failure to provide tens of thousands of SNAP applicants the benefits they were entitled to in a timely manner, and that suit was finally settled only two months ago. Citing those “long-standing problems of the UHIP program,” the suit claims there is a “very high probability that the data used to determine alleged overpayments is erroneous.”

According to the ACLU, Correa was given a month to sign an overpayment agreement with the state or else face what the lawsuit calls “harmful” cuts to her SNAP benefits.

If those cuts occur, the lawsuit claims that Correa “will have great difficulty feeding herself and her niece” and, unable to pay her bills, could have her utilities shut off. The suit points out that federal SNAP regulations require overpayment notices to “include the reason for the claim and an explanation of how the [amount] was calculated,” information missing from the notice to Correa.

Unlike the current notices, the suit notes, overpayment notices that had been sent out in past years by the pre-UHIP computer system provided all the information required by the federal regulations.

The lawsuit argues that the inadequate notices violate the due process rights of Correa and all other SNAP beneficiaries receiving similar notifications.

The suit seeks a temporary restraining order, and permanent relief, barring DHS from continuing to issue over-issuance letters “without adequate written notice” or from taking action against Correa or any other individuals based on the inadequate notices.