May 22, 2020

Is This A Half Step Forward?

     From Emergency Message EM-20022 issued yesterday:
The purpose of this EM is to provide the Field Office (FO) and Payment Center (PC), and the Office of Hearings Operations (OHO) with temporary supplemental instructions for documenting appointment of a representative while the COVID-19 case processing procedures are in place. ...
To appoint a representative, our regulations require the claimant submit a dated and signed written notice. GN 03910.040 and GN 03940.003 require that the signatures on the notice of appointment and fee agreement be in pen-and-ink to provide a measure of protection of the claimant’s privacy and data integrity. ...
If the claimant’s signature on a notice of appointment (for example, Form SSA-1696) does not meet the standards listed in GN 03910.040 (e.g., signature appears to be electronic or a digitized image of a handwritten signature), follow the instructions below – ... 
Contact the claimant to confirm his or her signature, after verifying identity, and intent to sign following these steps: ...
Confirm that the claimant signed the appointment with intent to sign it using the following script:
  • “We have received an appointment form with your electronic signature and need to ask you a few simple questions to confirm you signed it. Did you sign this form?”
  • “And you understood that by electronically signing this form, you agreed [insert name of Appointed Representative on the SSA-1696] will now represent you on your claim with SSA, and [he/she] and [his/her] employees can obtain information about your claim from SSA?”...

5 comments:

Anonymous said...

15 U.S. Code 7001(a)(1) states that “a signature, contract, or other record relating to such transaction may not be denied legal effect, validity, or enforceability solely because it is in electronic form. . ,” and the Government Paperwork Elimination Act (GPEA, P.L. 105-277)

There are only two requirements in the regulations for the appointment of an attorney representative. The first is that the client sign a written notice stating that he or she wants the person to be their representative. The second requirement is that it be filed with one of the offices, an ALJ or the appeals council. CFR 404-1707. The wet signature requirement is in the POMS. SSA can't add additional requirements to what is required by the regulations so the POMS requirement is not valid.

Why does SSA feel the law doesn't apply to them? Is there really a problem with fraudulent 1696s? Or, is this just a way to make it more difficult for claimants to obtain representation? Or, is this just typical bureaucratic "its this way because we say it is" bs?

It couldn't be more clear: "a signature, contract, or other record relating to such transaction may not be denied legal effect, validity, or enforceability solely because it is in electronic form. . ."

Anonymous said...

@9:58

SSA feels the law doesn't apply to them because of sovereign immunity.

Not to say that SSA's ignoring 15 U.S.C. § 7001(a)(1) is not irritating, but the effort required to actually force them to acknowledge it outweighs the effort SSA would expend on updating their procedures, or at least I suspect that's what they've been betting on. As far as I know, it's paid off for them so far, although I am curious if there has been any legal challenges on the issue.

Anonymous said...

@12:16

The National Federation for the blind and 4 independent Plaintiffs filed a lawsuit in Federal Court this week. See Federal News Radio, May 19, 2020, “Lawsuit filed against SSA for refusing electronic signatures.

Anonymous said...

SSA believes that the law does not apply to them because it is all non-lawyers who are really calling the shots. Operations is the name of the game.

Anonymous said...

The SSA is always making it more difficult on lawyers. For some reason, they refuse to recognize law firms. I have practiced numerous areas of law such as workers comp and civil litigation. Most courts just want to know the lawyer is a lawyer. There is really no formal requirement to make an appearance.

No way workers comp could work this way in California. There are numerous hearings and depositions to appear. Attorneys are always helping each other out to make appearances. Never will understand this reluctance to recognize law firms.