LIRC determined that there was no evidence that Farrand maintained
an office devoted to business purposes or that Farrand chose where she performed
her services. Legacy argues that this condition was met based on Follett’s
unrebutted testimony that Farrand performed her sales solicitation services at her
home office or prospective customer’s private homes. It further claims that
Farrand chose where to perform her services because she could decide which
potential customers to visit. These claims are not supported by the Record. While
Follett testified that Farrand “explained … that she worked out of her home,” he
admitted that he did not see her home office and was not sure whether Farrand
used her equipment and materials for personal use:
Q. [Y]ou said that she had a business phone[. D]o you
know if that was also her personal phone number?
A. I do not. That was the number that she indicated as her
business number[.]
Q. You indicated that you had her email account, the
Hotmail account; do you know if that was also the same
as her personal email?
A. I do not know.
Q. [Y]ou said that … you knew she had the internet, the
computer, a printer, paper, phone, a vehicle; do you
know if she had all those things before she began
working for Legacy Assurance Plan?
A. From our conversations, some of her prior … job, I do
specifically remember her telling me about her home
office arrangement and how she worked out of her
home, etcetera, um, in that capacity in that––that prior
… with the prior employer.
Q. Do you know if she also used those items for her
personal use?