From Emergency Message EM-23054:
This emergency message (EM) notifies technicians that we no longer require a signature on any version of the SSA-455 [a Continuing Disability Review form sent to claimants]...
SSA recently received OMB [Office of Management and Budget, whose pro forma OK is required before changing forms] approval to discontinue the requirement for a signature on the CDR Mailer form SSA-455 and SSA-455-OCR-SM. The latest inForm Library version of the SSA-455 has been updated to remove the signature box. ...
If we can dispense with the signature requirement on this form, can't we dispense with some other signature requirements or at least verification of electronic signatures? There's a lot of field office time wasted on this.
5 comments:
Why did SSA revert back to no longer accepting fax of signed applications such as SSA-16, and SSA-8001? Huge waste of resources and time.
Because the people that make those decisions have no idea how the FO’s operate.
They love making things as difficult as possible for us to process claims.
They don’t need signatures on forms designed to review continuing eligibility…just all the ones where claimants are applying for new entitlements.
The official line is that this is because the national health crisis is over and that that this was a pandemic-specific policy relaxation.
In reality, it is yet another in a long line of unforced errors by agency leadership.
Non accepting faxed application is one of those decisions that I will never understand. I used to mail applications via certified mail. At least 40% were not processed timely because the LDO claimed it never received them. It was a huge cost to keep mailing them back to them, and at the end because of the little green card, they did accept a faxed copy. Horrible turn of event.
Post a Comment