From
KMOV in St. Louis:
People who fake disabilities to get paid are part of an exploding entitlement program.
Here in St. Louis, the fakers contribute to the
backlog, which forces people with real disabilities to wait up to two
years to get approved.
In fact, the downtown St. Louis Social Security
Administration office has the longest wait time for a disability ruling
appeal in the country.
So the SSA is increasing efforts to bust the phonies. ...
Meanwhile the St. Louis CDI unit, of Cooperative
Disability Investigations unit, is busting people like one man who
applied for disability claiming constant pain, problems with sitting,
standing and walking.
But he was caught on video walking his dogs, carrying an amplifier and guitar, and helping to push a woman into a truck.
Another man applied for disability claiming severe back and shoulder pain.
But later he was caught on video at football practice where he’s seen stretching, and throwing around the pigskin.
Online the SSA posts these videos and others showing the fraud.
People who applied for disability, like a man
spotted wrestling in the ring, or a man who uses a cane inside the
Social Security office lobby, but then seems fine when he’s loading
furniture in a dumpster, or sweeping leaves off his roof.
Those who actually adjudicate these claims or who represent these claimants know that fraud is a tiny part of the Social Security disability programs but those who want to believe otherwise will never listen.
17 comments:
Why is it so hard for people to admit fraud or "similar fault" as SSA sometimes calls it, is more common than previously thought?
Cause without ironclad medical proof, it's one persons far right unsubstantiated opinion without any factual medical evidence to back up that accusation.
None of these alleged fraudulent activities would constitute substantial gainful activity. Walking his dogs, really? And how could they post these videos without violating privacy regulations? This whole thing smells like really old fish.
Social Security fraud is much more prevalent than many would like to believe. Indeed, fraud is the making any false statement of a material fact or the knowing using any such false statement. Thus, when a claimant denies any recent work activity in a work history report or at the hearing, but the record shows they did work, or the claimant alleges their impairments were so incapacitating that they essentially never left their room, but the record shows they engaged in various activities, the claimant has engaged in fraud. Further, counsel that knowingly allow false statements to be made or used are parties to the fraud. Moreover, ALJs who do not critically read the entire file and, thus, are unaware of any material false statements contribute to fraud. And, worse, ALJs who knowingly ignore false statements, that is, choose to the look the other way because, also contribute to the problem of fraud. Many people will state that false statements are just a bit of exaggeration, and are just credibility factors, which may be true in part, but that is also just a polite way of saying fraud.
Remember, you can be a disabled liar. Just become a claimant exaggerates his limitations or outright lies about some aspects of his medical condition or activities does not mean that he cannot meet the SSA disability standard, especially if he is 50 or older and can be found disabled based on his age.
Well then, since they're disabled AND a liar, they get a free pass. That's gotta be a tough life!
To: Anon 8:07 AM, May 24, 2013
Being disabled IS a tough life. How big a pay cut would you be taking if you got that sick or injured?
"Thus, when a claimant denies any recent work activity in a work history report or at the hearing, but the record shows they did work..."
Is the presumption that the earnings record is correct? Hopefully a naked earnings record isn't being used to deny claims without some supporting material. How many times have we reviewed work history with a client and they have no idea what a company is, especially if it is listed as across the country?
I called ODAR because this was going to be an issue in a case. I was told by a group supervisor that they wouldn't correct the record and that they would not refer situation to investigate apparent SSN misuse.
To the larger point, video's could show something dramatic - like wresteling, then again, it could be a mental claim. (Then again again brain trauma could be an asset in pro wrestling). But does walking your dog imply SGA? Do minimal activities, performed in your own home, where you are free to stop or rest at any time, for any duration, really show ability to do competetive employment?
Justin
The examples in the article consist of claims that people are not disabled due to things such as dog walking, or throwing around a football (maybe after eating some Oxycontin), but then go on to conclude with an example of a legitimately disabled guy who did some work because he was bored out of his mind, did it, and then died because of his disabilities. The latter being a true Republican hero no doubt, but certainly no reasonable role-model for the rest of the disabled.
This is one reason why those "you can still work a little bit" programs will never "work" on a large scale.
Who in their right mind would risk being the next video-star?
"Being disabled IS a tough life. How big a pay cut would you be taking if you got that sick or injured?"
A huge one. That's why I won't apply unless I'm actually debilitated.
How big a pay cut are all those 40+ adults filing SSI only claims taking?
The average adult filing for SSI Is not taking any pay cut! That is the part about that program no one seems to understand. To be "uninsured" for disability means you have had minimal or no recent work. $710.00 per month is not a lot at all, but when your prior monthly amount was $0.00, it's not bad. You also get medical, food stamps and usually some type of rental assistance. Will you be rich, no. Will you be better off than you were, yes! The dangling carrot is hard to resist for most.
@ 10:59am: Not everyone gets the exact same benefits, $710.00 is the max for 2013 per month, SSI is a needs based program, one gets $710 if one lives alone and is not living under someone elses roof. As to medical, that's a bad joke and food stamps? For example people in CA who get SSI don't get food stamps cause of a dispute between CA and the USDA/SSA, yes I speak from experience, most SSI detractors are guilty of judging a book by it's exterior looks, shame on them, for they know not of which they speak.
I understand SSI can be different and that $710.00 is the max is states without a supplement. I also know many SSI recipients make false statements to obtain the federal maximum - I see it daily. Most of the time "something" is better than "nothing". So the medical is a joke? Don't use it. Have something better? If not, why complain? Seems to me that's the problem with entitlement programs in general. If SSI didn't exist, then what?
SSI replaced public assistance for the disabled, beginning in 1974. In NY State, the current SSI rate for a single adult is more than twice what the equivalent public assistance grant would be for a non-disabled adult. And Medicaid entitlement is automatic. It is far more money than what they have been receiving either from P.A. or from their limited work activity in their lives. It truly is a windfall for them.
Don't forget, SSI does not have a family cap, so a mother with 6=7 kids can get $4,200.00 or so per month. Further, why is it automatically assumed that anyone wanting accountability in the program is labeled as "far right"? Every citizen should be concerned about fraud in any government endeavor.
Mr. Hall--your blog is valuable and read by many ssa employees. Your bias that almost everyone who applies for DIB benefits is much less valuable. The age 50 allowance business is especially troubling with an aging population. The DDS decision making process is unpredictable. The post entitlement fraud from work, hidden marriages, lies about living arrangements, parents holding children back in order to keep the check coming is real. Any honest SSA staff member can provide examples.
Regarding some of the above comments, of course one does not need to live a life devoid of joy, be unable to participate in any activities whatsoever, or be confined to bed to be disabled. However, if the claimant alleges he is, and the record shows he is not, he is not telling the truth, which undercuts his credibility. If the claimant is awarded benefits, in part, because of his false statements, the claimant committed fraud. The attorney who knowingly allows their clients to make false statements is unethical and should be disbarred. Similarly, judges who do not fully know their files and, thus, do not know whether a claimant's statements are consistent or inconsistent, cannot possibly accurately decide whether the claimant is disabled or not disabled. And judges who are aware of the inconsistencies and know the claimant is making false statements, but ignores them, is more than negligent, they are also unethical and should also be disbarred because each negligently granted claim hurts the program and the public, and each negligently denied claim terribly harms the claimant and their family. But, in the world of SSA executives, a quick, but wrong (and possibly based on fraud) decision, is better than a thoughtful, correct decision.
Post a Comment