I first posted this last July and wondered at the time whether Social Security was acting as if Republicans would be in charge of the House of Representatives forever. This may be something the House Social Security Subcommittee ought to look at.
From the Virginian-Pilot:
Widows and widowers who were shortchanged on Social Security benefits by an estimated $131.8 million won’t get any of that money back, despite an Inspector General report calling for action.
Earlier this year, the administration’s Office of the Inspector General issued an audit report that determined the Social Security Administration underpaid 9,224 people over the age of 70. In addition, as more people in this group turn 70, the underpayment will amount to $9.8 million annually, auditors found.
The report said SSA officials agreed to “take action, as appropriate” for 41 beneficiaries it identified directly in the sample study and determine if it should review the records of more than 13,000 other beneficiaries. It also asked the administration to review its procedures and staff training for informing beneficiaries of their claiming options.
SSA has since provided “nationwide training” to field office workers about these survivor options and changed the language in application materials, said Darren Lutz, a Social Security spokesman.
It won’t, however, change anyone’s benefits retroactively based on the study.
“We reviewed the cases from the audit and determined they were adjudicated correctly, according to the law,” he said in an email. He declined to comment beyond the statement or make officials available to discuss the training. ...
2 comments:
The OIG report states "SSA policy states its employees must explain the advantages and disadvantages of filing an application and the filing considerations so the claimant can make an informed filing decision. The decision to file belongs solely to the claimant."
This used to be true but, a couple of years ago, didn't SSA tell its employees not to discuss such matters as options in filing for retirement? Claims representatives used to routinely calculate and discuss the "breakeven point" for taking early retirement, so that claimants could make informed decisions on when to file. SSA told CRs to stop doing so. It appears SSA is not longer interested in helping claimants and this is another example.
When they went to many/most retirement claims being filed online, they did away with explanations. In the old days most folks were encouraged to choose MOE option A, the most advantageous month. MOE choice C was choosing a month that may not be advantageous. We had to document why the person made this choice. Now, the vast majority of retirement/widows claims before FRA are MOE choice C where a statement is issued saying the clmt knows that his/her choice may be disadvantageous but chooses it anyway.
If a CR talks to the clmt they can often find out why they make an MOE choice that looks not advantageous. Sometimes there is a good reason but frequently it is due to a misunderstanding. But if you don't talk to them, just take their choice without questioning it, you get some bad choices.
Post a Comment