This Looks Awful

     From WFTV in Orlando:

Jennifer Groover has received Social Security since she was 6 years old because she has Down Syndrome.

But 38 years later, the Social Security Administration has taken away those benefits, her only income, because they said they had no evidence or documentation right now saying she has the disability.

“We’ve got one letter that she needs to go to work,” Cynthia Groover, her mom, said. “Yeah, they said we’ll help her get a job. She can go to work. She can barely walk. Her legs and feet are so bad. She’s so full of arthritis, and there’s no way she could walk. No, she can’t. She doesn’t have the mentality to hold the job.”

In July of 2023, the family received a letter giving them 10 days to respond.

If not, the SSA said it may have to make a “finding of not disabled because of insufficient evidence.”

Notes from the Groovers said they could not get anyone to answer after they left 16 messages. ...

But on July 15, 2023, her benefits stopped after they decided “she was no longer disabled.” ...

In that year, they were evicted from their home and have struggled every month to pay their bills. ...

There has been some movement in her case.

The Groovers tell Channel 9 that Social Security wants them to get a blood test to determine if Jennifer has that extra chromosome, which has not happened yet. ...

    In case you don't know the law, the Groovers don't have to produce any evidence whatsoever for their daughter to stay on benefits. The burden is squarely on Social Security to produce evidence that this young woman has improved. The agency's inability to find its old file isn't reason to cut her off benefits. 

    You would think that anyone would realize that Down Syndrome won't go away or get better with time but you never know just how foolish these things can get. I've had a client with retinitis pigmentosa denied because there was no recent evidence that she was blind. The old evidence wasn't enough. If you know anything about retinitis pigmentosa, you know it's a one way trip. Once your vision is gone, it's gone for good and there's no more point in going to an eye doctor.

Telephone Hearings Predominate -- Is That A Good Thing?

     From a recent presentation by the Commissioner of Social Security:

Click on image to view full size

    What if I told you that claimants who show up for in person hearings with an attorney win 5% more often than represented claimants who have telephone hearings? I can't tell you that because I don't know. I've seen no stats on this. Maybe there's some difference. Maybe there's not. You'd think that Social Security could generate those numbers but if they've compiled them, they haven't released them. And don't give me aggregate numbers on telephone hearings. We all know that unrepresented claimants with in person hearings lose most of the time because they couldn't find an attorney to represent them and either didn't show up or show up and lose because of the same problems that made it hard for them to find an attorney.

Commissioner Doesn't Like Agency Notices

     From an interview that Social Security Commissioner Martin O'Malley recently gave to NPR:

The notices that we send out, I have described them as Mad Libs written by mad lawyers that confuse, they scare, and most people have a difficult time understanding what many of these notices even say.

It's Kinda Hot In Orlando This Time Of Year

     From WFTV:

Dozens of people waited in line for hours outside the newly opened Social Security Administration Office on Orange Avenue in downtown Orlando.

It’s been a daily occurrence since the new office opened on Monday, June 17.

Social Security Administration told Eyewitness News Tuesday evening that the long lines were due to recently implemented security screening requirements.

 “We are working on a long-term security screening solution for the building, potentially including an additional magnetometer,” the agency said. ...

Eyewitness News spoke to people in line Tuesday who reported up to 3 hours to get in and out of the office. Some toward the end of the line said they had been there an hour and a half.

This was as dozens were fighting Orlando’s 90-degree heat in the line, including the elderly, the disabled bound by wheelchairs, and children. No overhang or shelter was covering most of the line.

“It’s super hot! I can’t even take it,” said 7-year-old Marly, waiting to go into the office with her dad. ... 

"I Never Inherited Anything"

Kristy Strong

     From Newsweek:

Kristy Strong, a 45-year-old disabled woman in Elizabeth City, North Carolina, was shocked when her Supplemental Security Income benefits were stopped in January. ...

"They claim I was overpaid," Strong told Newsweek. "I was sleeping behind dumpsters [and] eating out of trash cans, so I had nothing."

When Strong received the letter saying she owed the money, she immediately appealed and contacted legal counsel, but she said she has been waiting for a court date for more than six months, even though her lawyer told her the case has been expedited, she said. ...

Strong didn't even know what assets the SSA had been referring to but was informed the agency was under the impression that Strong had inherited property when her grandmother died in November 2021.

"I told them I did not," Strong said. "My grandma left everything to my aunt, who didn't have money to probate her will, and had asked me to sign a paper agreeing not to have to probate it. I never inherited anything."

She was told by Social Security she would have to prove she didn't own the property, despite it never being in her name. ...

"I wish people knew that real peoples' lives are at stake, and this isn't just a debate in an election year," Strong said. "So much more is at risk than votes."

Recent Posts On Frustrated Claimants Blog

     I also run a separate blog directed at Social Security disability claimants titled For The Frustrated Social Security Disability Claimant. Here are recent posts on that blog that might interest you.

• What Do I Need To Get Together Before I File A Claim For Social Security Disability?
• How Do I Prepare For My Social Security Disability Hearing?
•  Some Good News
•  I'm On Social Security Disability Benefits. What Happens When I Hit Full Retirement Age?
•  Sorry To Give You Grim News But Here It Is
•  "The Breath Of The Dead"
•  Don't Believe Everything You Read Online
•  Despite What Some People Say, Work Isn't Getting Any Easier
•  Not Now. Not Later. Not Ever
•  Disability And Increasing Age
•  The Death Of Children And Social Security Disability

House Appropriations Committee Draft Of FY 2025 Appropriations Bill

     The Republican majority of the House Appropriations subcommittee having jurisdiction over Social Security has released its version of an appropriations bill covering Social Security for Fiscal Year (FY) 2025, which begins on October 1 of this year. It provides for a $13.8 billion appropriation for Social Security's administrative expenditures. This is below the $14.1 billion that the agency has been allocated for the current FY.

    The President's proposed bill for FY 2025 contains $15.4 billion for Social Security.

    This can't get passed without the agreement of the Senate and the White House. Also, nothing is likely to be passed until after the new Congress begins just after New Year's Day in 2025. The new Congress may have different opinions about this appropriations bill.

Res Judicata Won't Apply To Denials Based Upon Ability To Perform Work Outside The New Five Year Time Period

     From Emergency Message EM-24028:

... We will not apply res judicata to bar readjudication of a previously adjudicated period when the prior final determination or decision finding the claimant not disabled is dated prior to June 22, 2024, if the prior adverse determination or decision found the individual could do:

1. PRW [Past Relevant Work] at step four of the sequential evaluation process (SEP) and the PRW cited is not PRW under the PRW rule; OR

2. Other work at step five of the SEP, work experience was material to the decision, and the individual’s work experience is different under the PRW rule.

When these criteria are met, we will not apply res judicata to deny a subsequent claim or dismiss a request for hearing on that claim. ...

    OK, now what about cases pending at the Appeals Council or federal court where there were denials based upon ability to perform other "jobs" that are now considered off limits because they don't really exist any more?