the case late and there were some issues with the prior litigation. The claimant was working at a laundromat, but claimed that she was not getting paid and was just in training. We had surveillance that helped with that issue but the Board lost the digital audio recording of the claimant’s testimony. So, the claimant essentially got a redo of her testimony after she had already seen all our evidence. She was thus able to change her testimony and tailor it to our proofs. Where we were able to focus was the claimant’s assertion that she was not paid until AFTER we raised fraud and she disclosed her work-activity because she was training