I recently received a printout of the cases I have pending with the Office of Disability Adjudication and Review (ODAR). The oldest request for hearing date for a case that has not yet been scheduled (and for which there is no other explanation for it taking so long) is February 18, 2009, about thirteen months ago. The newest request for hearing date for which a hearing has been scheduled (and for which there is no other explanation for the rapid scheduling) is February 4, 2010. The one where the hearing was just requested a month ago has been scheduled for May 7, 2010.
I am happy that the oldest case is less than 13 months old. Not long ago, my oldest case would have been well over two years old. I still have to ask, how does it happen that one claimant is still waiting for a hearing to be scheduled after thirteen months while another gets a hearing scheduled within a month after a request for a hearing?
I am happy that the oldest case is less than 13 months old. Not long ago, my oldest case would have been well over two years old. I still have to ask, how does it happen that one claimant is still waiting for a hearing to be scheduled after thirteen months while another gets a hearing scheduled within a month after a request for a hearing?
8 comments:
In my experience, the more evidence a file contains, the longer it sits. Also, the focus appears to be on average processing times - clearly some recent cases are being used to help keep the average processing time lower. Of cource this is all contrary to assurances from the Commish and Chief ALJ that ODAR's policy is "first in, first out."
I have been having problems like this for a while. I have court remands and AC remands that have been sitting at ODAR for almost a year following remand, waiting for a hearing to be scheduled, while claimants who have only been out of work since July 2009 are already scheduled for hearings in the next 2 months. I don't see the rationale for this at all.
I think it may have to do with which ALJ pile the case is assigned. I have no idea how they shuffle and deal those cards.
it would largely depend on which ALJ its been assigned to and, these days, whether its been farmed out to another office. one of the biggest behind the scenes fights these days are offices that have received transfer files trying to get hearing rooms/remote sites from the originating offices.
SSA is doing what it has always done--manipulate statistics. I have seen this scenario many, many times. SSA makes itself look good to Congress while the real work sits undone.
MY case sat for OVER 28 months, and there was a total of 7,530 pages....I kept calling into SSA and telling them hey are you waiting for me to die or what? months later I was approved.....
Look at the claimant's profile. those over 50 years old with a fairly recent AOD are frequently screened for OTR. If the screener doesn't think an OTR is warranted, the case is (at least sometimes) scheduled quickly because there is some narrative of the facts.
Screened cases move more quickly. Cases that require development move more slowly. Cases that have tons of duplicative, cumulative evidence have to be sorted out page by page. They move more slowly. Prior applications and decisions must be located and obtained, so subsequent applications can move more slowly. Remanded cases have to be reorganized (stupid rule, but) and tend to be large files. Takes time. You can help things move more quickly if you don't file every piece of duplicative, cumulative evidence, narrow your issues in advance, amend your onset date in advance, request development in avance, file all the evidence quickly, etc.
Post a Comment