From a press release issued by Justice In Aging, an organization which "uses the power of law to fight senior poverty":
... The Social Security Administration issued an interim rule in August 2020, due to the national emergency, that was intended to create an easier process to “waive”—forgive—certain penalties SSA imposed related to ineligibility during the early months of the pandemic. However, the agency didn’t effectively inform people that the simplified waiver process even existed, and the waiver only covered the first six months of this ongoing pandemic—before the deadly winter wave of COVID-19 cases. If an individual was lucky enough to learn of the existence of the simplified waiver, their problems didn’t end there. For example, the individuals named in the lawsuit faced problems like being told to contact a specific person at a specific phone number, yet not being able to reach anyone or leave a message; and being told to make an appointment to request the simplified waiver, only to be told that there are actually no appointments available.
“This lawsuit aims to address the concerns of vulnerable citizens who rely on benefits from the Social Security Administration in order to survive,” said Sheila S. Boston, partner at Arnold & Porter. “Using the rule of law, we will hold Social Security accountable for amending its pandemic response to ensure that thousands of impacted individuals receive their benefits and information related to those benefits in a timely manner.” ...
The agency didn't notify notify the general public because it didn't change the waiver procedures for the general public. It only "streamlined" the internal process the agency uses to approve or deny waivers that fell into that particular period.
ReplyDelete12:58, the streamlined process meant that beneficiaries were not required to complete the usual form. It wasn't merely internal.
ReplyDeleteActually, both 12:58 and 4:28 are correct in regards to the streamlined waiver process.
ReplyDeleteIt is true that the streamlined processing was internal and not anything the public should have been notified about. If the employee determined the request for waiver fell within the period prescribed in the policy, then no the usual forms was not needed. So both can be correct. The person affected still had to call and request the waiver or submit something in writing.
The agency is actively internally trying to identify OP's and denials caused by incorrect actions taken during the pandemic based on my understanding.