My firm is seeing some Social Security hearings scheduled within a month after asking for one. This might be welcome news except for the fact that we have many other cases where claimants have been waiting for over a year for a hearing. These cases being scheduled rapidly are not ones which are supposed to be expedited, such as those for terminally ill claimants or "wounded warriors." We are seeing this from at least two different hearing offices. This just started this month.
Is this a local phenomenon or is something happening regionally or nationally that could explain this?
My opinion is that the only fair thing is to schedule hearings in the order in which claimants asked for them insofar as practical. What I am seeing seems inappropriate to me.
Is this a local phenomenon or is something happening regionally or nationally that could explain this?
My opinion is that the only fair thing is to schedule hearings in the order in which claimants asked for them insofar as practical. What I am seeing seems inappropriate to me.
Seems like an obvious ploy to bring down "average" processing time. I have seen it at times in the past, but not recently.
ReplyDeleteThat has been happening in my region of Louisiana for about a year now. The worst thing about this is that the hearings are being scheduled with no work-up. I'm not as well versed in the inner workings of the ODAR offices as many here are, but I suspect they are doing this with newer cases simply because it's easier to hand off to plug in a date than to do the pre-hearing work-up of exhibits. Also, the cases that get scheduled quickly are all electronic. It's killing any possibility I may have for helping the client to develop medical evidence - they either are or they aren't going to qualify when they apply, essentially. That may be good, but it is a big change from the past practices.
ReplyDeleteWe've seen some of this in our area, too. It seems that cases with the least amount of documentation are getting the rush treatment. Our theory is that it's because it will be quick and easy to deny those cases. They are almost always folks who are under 50, without insurance, who have mainly CE reports as their medical evidence.
ReplyDeleteThat has been happening here.
ReplyDeleteSeems the bigger the file, the longer the wait.
Yes I've seen it and believe it is driven by stats. If you have one case which is pending for 600 days and one which is pending for 100 days you can tout that your average processing time is only 350days! Doesn't seem fair because it isn't.
ReplyDelete(No doubt this is being done to leverage the average case processing time.)
ReplyDeleteBut, did a rep just complain that cases were being scheduled before they were worked up?!?! SPARE ME!
Once we become the rep, we share the responsibility for working that case up.
We only get paid for getting to "favorable." By contrast, the ALJ and HO staff get paid no matter what. And they're not our personal assistants.
If we don't turn up with some evidence on an unworked case, we *immediately* look unprofessional. Blaming the HO for not working up the case before scheduling it will only further detract from our professional reputations.
In this situation, we've got our work cut out for us:
1) Send a request to the ALJ for a CE;
2) Send the client out after their records; and
3) If your client can't afford the records, draft a subpoena and send request that the ALJ sign and return it. Explain that your client isn't in dire need, but can't afford the records.
If the ALJ returns your subpoena, serve it yourself. Maybe it won't work, but at least you TRIED to avert being forced into a second, supplemental hearing.
Walking into that hearing without trying #1,2 and 3 is NOT zealous representation of your client. Your client will have to wait to get scheduled a 2nd time.
Meanwhile, the HO will mark the case "heard," and move right along.
All Anons above are right in some times and some places, but there are other factors.
ReplyDeleteOf course, the bigger the file, the longer the wait, because it takes longer to pull the file. Some reps will send in duplicates and mountains of immaterial stuff. All of that has to come out of the file.
Of course, it is easier to deny individuals quickly who are young without much medical evidence. But why not process their claims expeditiously? If you are expecting ODAR to develop your record for you, it is not going to happen--no longer have the resources. And there is no excuse for growing the backlog to develop a claim where there is a perfectly competent rep.
How about expedited treatment for individuals who meet listings or are otherwise obviously disabled? Why should they wait?
How about scheduling cases quickly for which the records are complete? Tell us; we'll schedule.
FIFO means that no case moves faster than the slowest and most complicated case--bad plan.
You really want cases to move quickly and get that backlog down, give claimants an honest assessment of their likelihood of success. Don't appeal immaterial error.
Are the cases being scheduled so quickly scheduled by the local hearing office for local judges or have they been shifted to one of the national hearing centers? That might account for some differences.
ReplyDelete