The Raleigh News and Observer is reporting on the horrendous hearing backlog at Social Security. I have to salute Allsup's efforts to get these stories in local newspapers all over the country.
9 comments:
Anonymous
said...
careful what you wish for, all this negative publicity could end up in contracting out the disability program, then it will be an open denial culture and no accountability. Think it can't happen? Just remember 11/8/16.
Does something need to be done? Yes, the system is broken, but this is not the time.
I also question Allsup's motives. Who better to bid on a disability services contract, then a disability insurance company.
2:17 pm, Bravo. Alsup should spend more time developing their files before the hearing. Every time their rep shows up unprepared and the case has to go into POST status at OHO, it grows the backlog that they profess to hate so much.
Exactly. I have never seen an up-to-date Allsup file, they almost always have to go into POST because I'm missing a year or more of records that should be apparent to anyone that glances at the file, and I routinely have to develop their cases for them. I guess I now know what they're doing with all of their free time since they're not doing their job in getting the record together. It's disingenuous for Allsup to act as though they rely on the back benefits to get by. Most of their claims that I've handled have been LTD carriers paying them for half-worked cases.
I'm also curious to know what benefits the teacher is eligible to receive. In the states where I've worked, teachers don't have DIB coverage, they only get MQGE since their retirement goes into whatever state fund they have. If that's the case for her, it's going to be really unfortunate if she's expecting a cash payout. I've never liked having to explain MQGE to someone hoping for a cash benefit when they are not eligible for any such benefit.
If a rep is not updating a file ahead of time you should be reporting them for violating SSR 17-4p to your HOCALJ and have it sent up. The only way this can change is if enough ALJ's take the time to follow the actual procedure we have in place for when a rep doesn't prep a file as they are required to do by this SSR. When repped, the duty to update the file falls directly and clearly on the rep, not SSA. Failure to do so has penalties.
"Simply informing us of the existence of evidence without providing it or waiting until 5 days before a hearing to inform us about or provide evidence when it was otherwise available, may cause unreasonable delay to the processing of the claim, without good cause, and may be prejudicial to the fair and orderly conduct of our administrative proceedings. As such, this behavior could be found to violate our rules of conduct and could lead to sanction proceedings against the representative."
you must be new to SSA or outside the agency, because otherwise you'd know OGC and OIG aren't going to even think about sniffing around these complaints unless somehow fraud or large sums of money are involved or we've already been embarrassed in the national press, lol. I've seen ALJs in my office send up dead to rights proof of rep lying about very material things and OGC simply asked, "well, is this the first/only time?" and that was that. You think they're going to expend any effort on reps who submit evidence late? You're delusional.
Agreed, 1:29 PM. OGC and OIG would need substantial funding increases in order to chase down out-of-state hedge-fund operated "advocacy firms", or solo practitioners who don't develop the file at hearing but then collect EAJA fees on the District Court appeals. That sounds like important work in improving SSD-applicant representation and helping decrease the backlog... but without additional funding and/or personnel, how are OGC and OIG going to prioritize policing the reps?
We've been told that OGC is taking 17-4p seriously, so I've been reporting behavior like that up the chain. When that occurs in a favorable decision, another option is to challenge their fee and cut it, which I've done multiple times. I've never had either issue with local reps, only the multi-state or national firms.
I've been told lots of things about OGC and what this agency prioritizes, and then I've seen many totally different things happen and lots of those stated things not happen.
For the folks who don't like the idea of reporting these reps: So you have a rule that is supposed to help, SSA says that "Hey we have done something, here is the process to try to help you" - and you're saying just ignore it?
Bemoaning that these reps aren't doing their jobs and bemoaning that nothing will happen if you actually follow the process proposed to address it- without trying it - lessens the strength of your argument to that of less than a whisper.
I say try. Maybe the cumulative effect will create an unexpected outcome.
9 comments:
careful what you wish for, all this negative publicity could end up in contracting out the disability program, then it will be an open denial culture and no accountability. Think it can't happen? Just remember 11/8/16.
Does something need to be done? Yes, the system is broken, but this is not the time.
I also question Allsup's motives. Who better to bid on a disability services contract, then a disability insurance company.
Better the devil you know. ...
Just saying.
2:17 pm, Bravo. Alsup should spend more time developing their files before the hearing. Every time their rep shows up unprepared and the case has to go into POST status at OHO, it grows the backlog that they profess to hate so much.
@3:51
Exactly. I have never seen an up-to-date Allsup file, they almost always have to go into POST because I'm missing a year or more of records that should be apparent to anyone that glances at the file, and I routinely have to develop their cases for them. I guess I now know what they're doing with all of their free time since they're not doing their job in getting the record together. It's disingenuous for Allsup to act as though they rely on the back benefits to get by. Most of their claims that I've handled have been LTD carriers paying them for half-worked cases.
I'm also curious to know what benefits the teacher is eligible to receive. In the states where I've worked, teachers don't have DIB coverage, they only get MQGE since their retirement goes into whatever state fund they have. If that's the case for her, it's going to be really unfortunate if she's expecting a cash payout. I've never liked having to explain MQGE to someone hoping for a cash benefit when they are not eligible for any such benefit.
If a rep is not updating a file ahead of time you should be reporting them for violating SSR 17-4p to your HOCALJ and have it sent up. The only way this can change is if enough ALJ's take the time to follow the actual procedure we have in place for when a rep doesn't prep a file as they are required to do by this SSR. When repped, the duty to update the file falls directly and clearly on the rep, not SSA. Failure to do so has penalties.
"Simply informing us of the existence of evidence without providing it or waiting until 5 days before a hearing to inform us about or provide evidence when it was otherwise available, may cause unreasonable delay to the processing of the claim, without good cause, and may be prejudicial to the fair and orderly conduct of our administrative proceedings. As such, this behavior could be found to violate our rules of conduct and could lead to sanction proceedings against the representative."
@ 9:25
you must be new to SSA or outside the agency, because otherwise you'd know OGC and OIG aren't going to even think about sniffing around these complaints unless somehow fraud or large sums of money are involved or we've already been embarrassed in the national press, lol. I've seen ALJs in my office send up dead to rights proof of rep lying about very material things and OGC simply asked, "well, is this the first/only time?" and that was that. You think they're going to expend any effort on reps who submit evidence late? You're delusional.
Agreed, 1:29 PM. OGC and OIG would need substantial funding increases in order to chase down out-of-state hedge-fund operated "advocacy firms", or solo practitioners who don't develop the file at hearing but then collect EAJA fees on the District Court appeals. That sounds like important work in improving SSD-applicant representation and helping decrease the backlog... but without additional funding and/or personnel, how are OGC and OIG going to prioritize policing the reps?
We've been told that OGC is taking 17-4p seriously, so I've been reporting behavior like that up the chain. When that occurs in a favorable decision, another option is to challenge their fee and cut it, which I've done multiple times. I've never had either issue with local reps, only the multi-state or national firms.
I've been told lots of things about OGC and what this agency prioritizes, and then I've seen many totally different things happen and lots of those stated things not happen.
For the folks who don't like the idea of reporting these reps: So you have a rule that is supposed to help, SSA says that "Hey we have done something, here is the process to try to help you" - and you're saying just ignore it?
Bemoaning that these reps aren't doing their jobs and bemoaning that nothing will happen if you actually follow the process proposed to address it- without trying it - lessens the strength of your argument to that of less than a whisper.
I say try. Maybe the cumulative effect will create an unexpected outcome.
Post a Comment