I'm wondering how to re-word a fee agreement. It's my understanding this will now be an annual increase based on COLA, which makes sense. When the fees last went up, I had several cases in which I was shorted because my agreement said "currently $6,000, but may be increased from time to time by the Commissioner of Social Security." Despite that language, I lost several max fees. I didn't fight it because I didn't want to create an overpayment for my clients, but I'd like to avoid further problems. The cases we're signing up now will be subject to the increase.
Shocked you don't know this but that's what the relevant language is. And the field offices still get it incorrect because they read the number without reading the language itself.
As an SSA employee who works fee cases, the $9200.00 is fine. But what is of concern that that the fee is going up annually.
We already get a lot of errors. Fee agreements say 25%, or $6000.00, or the max. The person coding the award codes $6000.00 when it should be the max ($7200.00). If the attorney later complains we have to do a time-consuming failure to withhold for $1200.00 , which requires new notices and posting an overpayment. .
With more frequent fee cap changes, there will of course be more errors.
Maybe NOSSCR and NADR could work with SSA and OMB to make any changes to the SSA-1693 that they think are needed, and then push their members to use the 1693 instead of custom fee agreements. The next step would be teaching SSA employees to process the 1693 correctly, ideally making systems changes to make it easier for them to process 1693s.
Wait for it… someone is going to bitch it’s not sooner.
ReplyDeleteI think they should update the cap percentage to 33% instead of the current 25%. Hopefully that comes next.
ReplyDeleteFor what reason, 10:05 AM?
ReplyDeleteI'm wondering how to re-word a fee agreement. It's my understanding this will now be an annual increase based on COLA, which makes sense. When the fees last went up, I had several cases in which I was shorted because my agreement said "currently $6,000, but may be increased from time to time by the Commissioner of Social Security." Despite that language, I lost several max fees. I didn't fight it because I didn't want to create an overpayment for my clients, but I'd like to avoid further problems. The cases we're signing up now will be subject to the increase.
ReplyDeleteShocked you don't know this but you use an escalator clause
ReplyDeleteShocked you don't know this but that's what the relevant language is. And the field offices still get it incorrect because they read the number without reading the language itself.
ReplyDeleteThat’s because you’re counting on a person to actually read the agreement and adjust the fee.
DeleteGood luck!
Glad to hear. Thank you for what you do. d:-)
ReplyDeleteAs an SSA employee who works fee cases, the $9200.00 is fine. But what is of concern that that the fee is going up annually.
ReplyDeleteWe already get a lot of errors. Fee agreements say 25%, or $6000.00, or the max. The person coding the award codes $6000.00 when it should be the max ($7200.00). If the attorney later complains we have to do a time-consuming failure to withhold for $1200.00 , which requires new notices and posting an overpayment. .
With more frequent fee cap changes, there will of course be more errors.
Maybe NOSSCR and NADR could work with SSA and OMB to make any changes to the SSA-1693 that they think are needed, and then push their members to use the 1693 instead of custom fee agreements. The next step would be teaching SSA employees to process the 1693 correctly, ideally making systems changes to make it easier for them to process 1693s.
ReplyDeleteSo increased rep fees are good but OT to work down the backlog is bad. Got it
ReplyDeleteYou have it spot on sir
Delete