Board of Review Decision 352-N568-9N7J

The review examiner concluded the claimant had not verified his identity because he did not provide contemporaneous documentation of his current address and did not present a valid state-issued identification card. On remand, the claimant presented a valid Massachusetts driver’s license bearing his current address and bank statements verifying that address. As this information matched the information on his Social Security card, the claimant presented substantial evidence verifying his identity as required under G.L. c. 151A, § 25(a).

Board of Review
100 Cambridge Street, Suite 400
Boston, MA 02114
Phone: [phone]
Fax: [phone]

Issue ID: 352-N568-9N7J

Board of Review Decision

Introduction and Procedural History of this Appeal 

The claimant appeals a decision by a review examiner of the Department of Unemployment Assistance (DUA) to deny unemployment benefits. We review, pursuant to our authority under G.L. c. 151A, § 41, and reverse.

The claimant filed a claim for unemployment benefits with the DUA, effective October 19, 2025, which was denied in a determination issued on October 27, 2025. The claimant appealed the determination to the DUA hearings department. Following a hearing on the merits attended by the claimant, the review examiner affirmed the agency’s initial determination and denied benefits in a decision rendered on February 4, 2026. We accepted the claimant’s application for review.

Benefits were denied after the review examiner determined that the claimant did not meet the filing and registration requirement to verify his identity as the person who filed this claim for unemployment benefits, and, thus, he was disqualified under G.L. c. 151A, § 25(a). After considering the recorded testimony and evidence from the hearing, the review examiner’s decision, and the claimant’s appeal, we remanded the case to the review examiner to afford the claimant the opportunity to provide additional documentary proof of his identity. The claimant attended the remand hearing. Thereafter, the review examiner issued his consolidated findings of fact. Our decision is based upon our review of the entire record.

The issue before the Board is whether the review examiner’s decision, which concluded that the claimant provide did not provide substantial documentation to verify his identity because he did not produce a valid state-issued identification or contemporaneous documentation confirming his address, is supported by substantial and credible evidence and is free from error of law

Findings of Fact

The review examiner’s consolidated findings of fact and credibility assessment are set forth below in their entirety:

1. The claimant filed a claim for Unemployment Assistance (UA) which was to be effective for the week beginning 10/[19]/25. 
2. On 10/27/25, the Department of Unemployment Assistance (DUA) issued a Notice of Non-Monetary Issue Determination—Identify Verification informing him that he was not eligible to receive benefits for the period which is the subject of this appeal. 
3. The claimant timely appealed the Non-Monetary Determination. 
4. The claimant moved to Massachusetts from Maine in September 2025. 
5. The claimant’s address is [Address], in [City], Massachusetts [zip code] where he has lived since moving to Massachusetts. 
6. After he moved to Massachusetts, the claimant failed to surrender his Maine driver’s license and obtain a Massachusetts driver’s license within the time required by law. 
7. Finally, on 2/6/26, the claimant surrendered his Maine license and obtained a Temporary Massachusetts license which was valid until 4/7/26. 
8. The claimant’s temporary license has the claimant’s current address at [Address], [City].
9. At the hearing, the claimant submitted a copy of the front and the back of his permanent Massachusetts driver’s license which has an expiration date [o]f 3/6/30. 
10. The picture on the Massachusetts license resembles the individual who appeared at the hearing. 
11. The claimant submitted bank statements with his current [City] address on it. 
12. At the hearing, the claimant provided the front and back of his signed Social Security card. 
13. The signatures on the Social Security card and the Massachusetts driver’s license resemble one another. 

[Credibility] Assessment: 

The claimant was responsive and direct throughout the hearing and there is no reason to doubt his credibility.

Ruling of the Board

In accordance with our statutory obligation, we review the record and the decision made by the review examiner to determine: (1) whether the consolidated findings are supported by substantial and credible evidence; and (2) whether the review examiner’s conclusion is free from error of law. Upon such review, the Board adopts the review examiner’s consolidated findings of fact and deems them to be supported by substantial and credible evidence. We further believe that the review examiner’s credibility assessment is reasonable in relation to the evidence presented. However, as discussed more fully below, we reject the review examiner’s legal conclusion that the claimant is not entitled to benefits.

In order to obtain benefits, the claimant must meet the requirements of G.L. c. 151A, § 25(a), which provides, in relevant part, as follows:   

No waiting period shall be allowed and no benefits shall be paid to an individual under this chapter for—(a) Any week in which he fails without good cause to comply with the registration and filing requirements of the commissioner. . . .  

In this case, the issue presented to the review examiner was whether the claimant demonstrated that he was the person who filed a claim and not an imposter, who may have borrowed or stolen an identity to fraudulently collect benefits. At the initial hearing, the claimant provided a driver’s license issued by the State of Maine and a signed Social Security card bearing his name. However, he did not present valid state-issued identification or other documentation that verified his residential address. The review examiner also observed inconsistencies between the signature on the claimant’s Maine driver’s license and the signature on his Social Security card. Based on this information, the review examiner denied the claimant benefits.

On appeal, the claimant submitted a copy of his temporary Massachusetts driver’s license and explained that there had been a delay in obtaining valid state-issued identification from the Massachusetts RMV because he had not timely surrendered the driver’s license issued by the State of Maine. See Consolidated Findings 6 and 7.

The record now includes Remand Exhibit 4, a copy of claimant’s temporary Massachusetts driver’s license. See Consolidated Finding 8. Upon request at the remand hearing, the claimant also presented his permanent Massachusetts driver’s license. Consolidated Finding 9. The picture on both licenses resembles the individual appearing at the hearing and the address on both documents matches the address he used to file his claim for benefits. Consolidated Findings 5, 8, and 9. The claimant also submitted bank statements, which were admitted into evidence as Remand Exhibit 6, bearing his name and the same address that appears on his license. Consolidated Finding 11. After closely scrutinizing all the documents, the review examiner also found that the signature on the claimant’s Social Security card matches the signature on his Massachusetts driver’s license. Consolidated Finding 13. As the information on these documents matches the identifying information the claimant used to file his claim, we are satisfied that he has met his burden to show that he is the person who filed the unemployment claim and not an imposter. 

We, therefore, conclude as a matter of law that the claimant has produced substantial and credible evidence to verify his identity. He has met the registration and filing requirements for benefits pursuant to G.L. c. 151A, § 25(a).

The review examiner’s decision is reversed. The claimant is entitled to receive benefits for the week ending October 25, 2025, and for subsequent weeks if otherwise eligible.

Boston, Massachusetts                                              Date of Decision – July 8, 2026

1. Although the review examiner identified the claimant’s temporary Massachusetts driver’s license and bank statements as Exhibit 4 and Exhibit 6 respectively, these documents were admitted into evidence at the hearing held after the Board had remanded the case in order to obtain additional evidence. Accordingly, the documents are appropriately identified as Remand Exhibit 4 and Remand Exhibit 6 in our decision. 

Martha M. Wishart, Esq.
Chair

Michael J. Albano
Member

Any further appeal would further appeal further appeal would be to a Massachusetts State District Court
(See Section 42, Chapter 151A, General Laws, Enclosed)

The last day to appeal this decision to a Massachusetts District Court is thirty days from the mail date on the first page of this decision. If that thirtieth day falls on a Saturday, Sunday, or legal holiday, the last day to appeal this decision is the business day next following the thirtieth day.

Visit this page to locate the nearest Massachusetts District Court.

Please be advised that fees for services rendered by an attorney or agent to a claimant in connection with an appeal to the Board of Review are not payable unless submitted to the Board of Review for approval, under G.L. c. 151A, § 37.

LSW/rh