Clarifying Information:

Equitable Estoppel is a legal principle which means that, in certain cases, the Administrative Law Judge (ALJ) can order the department to stop doing something because it is not fair to a client i.e. overpayment. See WAC 388-02-0495 .

In 2012, the department, in consultation with Legal Services, the Office of the Attorney General and the Office of Administrative Hearings, developed a stipulation and agreed order of dismissal to be used to take the place of a formal administrative hearing and written decision by an Administrative Law Judge (ALJ), in cases where the client raises the equitable estoppel defense to eliminate an overpayment.

Appellants may raise the equitable estoppel as a defense in administrative hearings.

Exception: The equitable estoppel defense cannot be applied for overpayments related to the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program (SNAP), Food Assistance Program (FAP) or the Washington Combined Application Program (WASHCAP) as the principle of equitable estoppel is considered contrary to federal law. Because FAP and WASHCAP are required to mirror federal law it cannot be used for these programs. See WAC 388-410-0025 .

The Stipulation and Agreed Order of Dismissal should be considered for cases which meet all of the following conditions:

The sole issue for the administrative hearing is the fairness of the collection of an overpayment, and

Neither party (appellant or department) is disputing any fact affecting the outcome of the case. There is agreement about the amount and the facts of the overpayment; and

The department is satisfied that all elements of estoppel have been established by the appellant with "clear, cogent, and convincing" evidence. This means that the fact is proven by the evidence to be highly probable.

Cases must be determined individually based on each unique set of facts. The purpose of the stipulation is to avoid unnecessary administrative hearings. An administrative hearing is unnecessary only when the department agrees that the appellant has established the case for equitable estoppel and the appellant agrees to the facts of the overpayment. If either party, the AHC (or other department representative) or the appellant, disputes any fact affecting the outcome of the case, an administrative hearing should be held and a formal decision made by the ALJ.