Social Security will have a Notice of Proposed Rule-Making (NPRM) in the Federal Register tomorrow on protective filing dates. Here is Social Security's summary:
Update: This has now been published in the Federal Register.
We propose to revise our rules for protective filing after we receive a written statement of intent to claim Social Security benefits under title II of the Social Security Act (the Act). Specifically, we propose to revise from 6 months to 60 days the time period during which you must file an application for benefits after the date of a notice we send explaining the need to file an application. We are proposing this revision to make the time period used in the title II program consistent with the time period used in other programs we administer under the Act. We believe that eliminating the difference between the time periods in the programs we administer would make it easier for the public to understand and follow our rules.Would it not work just as well to revise the SSI rules to provide for a six month period there? It seems that the intent is to save a modest amount of money.
Update: This has now been published in the Federal Register.
2 comments:
This is actually good. People make appointments that they don't keep, then reschedule, sometimes more than once, wasting our time and displacing others who are trying to make appointments.
And they have six months to actually file a claim, while retaining the original contact date as their filing date. Sixty days is plenty of time. The longer time frame just invites abuse. People who are really disabled will pursue their claims without exacerbating the delays that already exist.
Actually if the person can file a claim even if they feel they are not ready and the claim is denied because they don't submit everything the claim can be reopened up to two years for new and material evidence.
Lengthening the protective filing for SSI makes no sense since it is a welfare program designed to meet the claimant's basic needs of food and shelter. If those needs are being met and they don't bother to file why should they be protected for procrastinating.
Post a Comment