Social Security FOIA [Freedom of Information Act] Reading Room routinely posts "Proactive Disclosures." Usually, it's just a couple of posts a month but they're starting off this month with a bang. Below is what they've posted so far. I guess this is based about recent FOIA requests they've replied to. It makes you wonder why some of these FOIA requests were made. By the way, this includes a list that purports to tell you the top 500 law firms receiving attorney fees in Social Security cases. I don't know about this list but in the past these numbers have been wildly inaccurate.
...I can get why the notary on Kijakazi's oath of office is censored, but I thought the expiration date/seal at least was required? Weird.
ReplyDelete@10:20: A notary seal isn’t present because it wasn’t signed by a notary, and didn’t need to be notarized. Note that the form says a notary seal should be affixed “if” signed by a notary.
ReplyDelete@10:43
ReplyDeleteAh! Thanks.
Interesting as to the Attorney fee payments that they specifically list by firm as receiving the fees and yet the SSA refuses to implement a system that notes that firms and not individuals are representing claimants.
ReplyDeleteAnd, yes, the amounts are not particularly accurate at least in my case but seem to reflect the fees to the firm while ignoring the fees that were sent where the firm should have been noted but was not.
MD espert payment rates have not been increased since at least 1968 when MOC pay was 1/6 of what it is today. The agency appears to have a plan to CUT the experts pay in July by requiring them to work for Med-nick, similar to the way Strattcom is picking the contract hearing reporter's meager pockets. This could be a big deal if you want experts at your hearings.
ReplyDeleteThis is happening at our HO. Also scheduling says that some MEs now have page limits for cases they'll read, which is a bad sign as page counts are skyrocketing with the increased availability of HIT MER.
DeleteThe "Top 500 firms by # of awarded clients" link isn't working. Anyone know if it was working when it was posted?
ReplyDeleteGruber is still listed as the head of OHO at the end of August 2022? Wasn't that after they told the Washington Post that she was reassigned?
ReplyDeleteThe representative fee list is interesting. Some national firms show up multiple times and in states where they're no longer located. Some other firms listed make a living at Federal Court more so than at the administrative levels -- are their EAJA fees included in this table?
ReplyDelete