From the summary of a change to Social Security's HALLEX manual:
We clarified that an ALJ must obtain concurrence from the Hearing Office Chief Administrative Law Judge (HOCALJ), Regional Chief Administrative Law Judge (RCALJ), and Regional Commissioner (RC) of the appropriate region to request the testimony of a particular FO [Field Office] employee at an appearance. We removed the phrase stating that the RCALJ may waive notification of the request because RCALJ's concurrence is now required.How might this come up? Let's say it's the testimony of a claimant that a particular field office employee, that he can identify by name, told him that he could not file a claim for Social Security benefits and that advice was incorrect and cost the claimant money. The Social Security Act would allow backdating of a claim in this circumstance. Wouldn't the field office employee's testimony be relevant?
9 comments:
Banning it outright would make it not a matter of discretion, which courts largely defer to. I imagine that's why they still keep the door open. This way they can still not pay backdated claims, but also keep their legal position strong.
I have only seen these request in non disability cases, usually overpayments. It's always better to get a vetted analysis of the calculation for the record. Rather than terrify some random employee, who probably made some minor mistake 2-3 years ago, by bringing them into a hearing setting and opening them up to cross examination.
@ 2:11PM, I think what you mean is that it is better to get someone to actually prepare and provide proof related to an overpayment that actually wasn't part of the record when the field office employee who stopped the claimant's benefits made that decision. Lord knows SSA wouldn't want to have its field office employees subjected to cross examination to defend a decision they were responsible for making.
@315 The only overpayment decisions made in the FO are for SSI overpayments. PC makes the decisions for T2 overpayments. If you want to pay to fly someone in from a PC that may be somewhat local or across the country, sounds good to me.
@3:15 if you really want that conversation just appear at the personal conference before it gets to the hearing and you have that opportunity. The problem is ALJs, representatives, and most OHO staff can’t read the records correctly to determine what is happening with the record and don’t bother to read the eNDSS included in every single overpayment or non-disability hearing. Why make the FO employee come to the hearing when you could go to the FO at any point and ask the same questions. Truth is, nobody wants to be inconvenienced going to the FO and since non dib hearings rarely pay anything to the reps directly, most don’t bother to learn the payment rules or take the time to review the case or even appear and represent.
This is hilarious-reps acting like they represent claimants on overpayment cases, chomping at the bit to cross examine Field Office employees. Just. Does. Not. Happen.
@2:54
We've done a few. They aren't particularly common. Far more often than not, they are valid overpayments and we turn the case down. But sometimes, usually when there is a SNT, WEP/GPO, or a communication issue between the payment center and FO an error can happen.
Had an overpayment where the claimant alleged he had reported the changed status at the local field office and it didn't get into the system.
Could have been interesting to get FO testimony but in the end, the claimant testified knowing the money was paid in error yet spent it anyway.
Sad to say, you need independent proof of anything you tell or give to someone at a field office or there is a "mild to moderate" chance you'll regret it. I prefer certified mail, confirming conversation content and with copies of anything I am submitting. Unfortunately, many unrepresented applicants and beneficiaries don't know that and they end up paying a price.
Post a Comment