From a section just added to Social Security's HALLEX Manual:
Last Update: 4/15/15 (Transmittal I-2-139)Before closing the hearing, the administrative law judge (ALJ) will remind the claimant that he or she must inform the ALJ about or submit, in its entirety, all evidence known to him or her that relates to whether he or she is blind or disabled. See 20 CFR 404.1512 and 416.912. If the claimant has a representative, then the ALJ will remind the representative that he or she must help the claimant obtain the information that the claimant must submit. See 20 CFR 404.1512, 404.1740, 416.912, and 416.1540. The ALJ must ask the claimant and the representative if they are aware of any additional evidence that relates to whether the claimant is blind or disabled.
8 comments:
Really? Just don't hide anything that may she'd some light on you client's ability to perform any type of work activity just so you can try and get them approved for benefits to sit at home...how's that?
Really, how about this?
[Hearing Ends-Judge asks his question] Your Honor, I know it is 11:45 AM, and you are ready for your lunch break, but I would like the claimant to describe his symptoms of IBD, in particular the specifics of his diarrhea while visiting the SSA bathroom this morning. We did not discuss this in testimony and believe it pertinent new evidence…or
Judge, I would like Mr. Jones, who has suffered from Chronic Schizophrenia for the last decade, worsened in the last years while waiting to appear before you, what he is thinking right now as we end the hearing…
Really. I already have a judge in mind.
This is insane. There are no parameters when it comes to new evidence related to disability. This is misguided fraud hubris. Watching the agency decline is a bit sad. This kind of policy rubbish would not have passed the smell test even a decade ago.
Diarrhea is a disability?
@ 3:52 If you don't know anything, please don't comment. IBS. 5.08. Figure it out.
The real problem with, and likely out come, of this reg and how its being implemented is that it is basically an ongoing discovery request, but unlike real court, all the evidence generated by this request becomes evidence of record. There is no filtering out of obviously irrelevant information as there would be in court (or most types of administrative hearings) via rules of evidence. Regs still say SSA has to address all evidence in the record and writing. More reading and writing = longer turnaround time for claims and more remands (for failing to address all the irrelevant information they mandated). And probably next to no appreciable increase in fraud detection, or whatever the purpose of this reg is supposed to be. Lots of regs/POMS/SSRs could use adjustment to make claims run smoother and reduce appeals. Why this is a priority is beyond me.
Yes sir, I'm sorry I'm not as smart as you are. Can you help me get benefits for my cognitive issues?
Some of you trolls who believe that this Hallex rule will not create incredibly foolish scenarios have obviously not been in hearings before many of the egotistical, control-minded individuals that often become ALJs.
Troll patrol in effect!
@ 7:10 I think your obvious personality disorder is a bigger problem. Here's hoping you get a debilitating case of ulcerative colitis to go along with it. Then we can all chuckle it up.
Tends to show that a disability is or is not present. See "relevance"
Post a Comment