Although there can be experienced and non-experienced representatives in both realms of attorney and non-attorney representation the problems is that non-attorney representation has a weak baseline standard and is virtually unregulated. Attorneys as a group have undergone the greatest, training, education and testing  standards of higher education available. The GAO in their 2007  Report found the SSA standard for a non-attorney representative as the following: 

“[SSA] currently allows nonattorneys who have represented as few as five disability claims before SSA over a 2-year period to qualify for fee withholding. Most judges we interviewed and more than half of the eligible nonattorneys considered this insufficient. And, according to an association of representatives, fee withholding is attracting more inexperienced nonattorneys to the field of disability representation….”

As stated in prior blogs repeatedly, ask your representative the following questions:

1. Will you be at my hearing and have you been to over 1,000 SSA hearings?

2. Will you be writing a prehearing brief with a chronological history of my medical records for submission to the hearing Judge?

3. Will you meet with me well before the day of the hearing to review the documents in my file and go over my testimony?

4. Will you obtain and purchase medical records before my hearing?

5. Will you contact each of my doctors with a questionnaire about my restrictions?

If your representative can not say YES to these basic questions you should find one who can.

Call 813-657-9175 for more information. www.TampaSSA.com

www.TampaVeteransLawyer.com

In general, Adult “Child Disability Benefits” retroactivity is determined in the following manner:

If the wage earner (the parent in this claim) is disabled, the application for adult-childhood disability could pay 12 months before the date of application but not before the wage earner’s onset (disability) date. 20 CFR §§ 404.620(a), 404.621(a)(1). If the wage earner is deceased or retired, the application for adult-childhood disability could pay 6 months before the date of application but not before the wage earner’s retirement entitlement date, in this case the “full retirement” date, age 65, considering the wage earner’s DOB which is in 1946. 20 CFR § 404.621(a)(2).

Also a key consideration is the calculation of the benefit amount:

If the wage earner is alive, the disabled adult child is entitled to 50% of the wage earner’s primary insurance amount (monthly benefit), subject to the family maximum. If the wage earner is deceased 75% of the wage earner’s primary insurance amount (monthly benefit), subject to the family maximum. 20 CFR § § 404.353, 404.304, 404.403.

As always we recommend that you find an experienced attorney in the matters above to represent you in your Social Security claim. The key considerations are the difference in obtaining thousands of dollars in benefits rightly owed. Just because you received an Award from SSA does not mean that its correct. In this case there was only 60 days to appeal the Award and the non-attorney failed to recognize the error. A second opinion from an actual attorney made all the difference. For more information please contact us at 813-657-9175.

Often, upon review of the hearing transcript an ME’s appearance and testimony goes uncontested via an inexperienced representative especially in the case of non-attorneys and those “last minute” day of the hearing representatives.

Some basic tips regarding the appearance of the ME are the following:

1.) If the ME appears by telephone object to phone testimony. Would a doctor diagnose or review a patient over the phone without seeing that person?

2.) If no Notice of a ME appearance by phone, object.

3.) If no Notice of a ME appearance, object.

4.) If the ME is an internist and is testifying regarding an orthopaedic condition then object. This kind of objection holds true in a multitude of “speculations” a medical expert often makes at SSA hearings where he/she is not “qualified” to answer, etc.

The above objections should only be done by a experienced and licensed attorney. Sometimes if testimony of a doctor can be “foreseeable” then the objection may not be warranted. This is a decision only an experienced attorney can make.

Some of the above objections may hold true for Vocational Expert (VE) testimony. VE’s will testify about jobs and the ramifications of your restrictions on the ability to perform work.

The objections above are only a small sampling of objections and problems at your SSA hearing.  The key factor is to obtain an experienced attorney you have met well prior to your hearing and an attorney who has gone over your testimony in depth with you before your hearing. For more information you can call us toll free at 1-855-418-9354 www.FloridaSocialSecurity.com.

SSA is still digesting and issuing the procedures around SSR-11-1p. Recently, SSA Office of Appellate Operations Executive Director Judge Patricia Jonas has implemented a policy change where a claimant may be able to file a “new”/”subsequent” application if there is an allegation of a “new critical or disabling condition” with an onset date AFTER the date of the hearing decision. Such requests are suppose to be processed within in 2 days.

However, what defines a “new critical or disabling condition” AFTER the onset date remains to be seen. There has not been any data that suggests a 2 day response time has been effectively followed.

SSR-11-1p implementation is just one of a thousand reasons you should hire an actual licensed attorney who has handled at least a 1000 Social Security Disability claims.

813-657-9175

David W. Magann, P.A.

Attorneys at Law

It is important to hire an actual attorney. Disability Experts of Florida, Quikaid, and Allsup are not attorneys. Binder & Binder although attorneys in New York send non-attorney clerks to hearings. Avoid these names and others where you don’t meet or can not talk to an actual attorney.

We recommend, to ask to see your representatives Florida Bar card before the Hearing and find that person on the www.FloridaBar.org website to see his or her history with the Florida Bar.

If your Social Security representative is not an attorney you should immediately ask the Judge for an attorney. This is your right.

Don’t be hurt by a law firm sending a non-attorney to your most important day of your claim which will predict the outcome of winning or losing precious benefits.

The Social Security Administration has a list of actual attorneys who can represent you and/or you can call us at 813-657-9175

There are 28 exclusions for “deeming” under 20 CFR 416.1161. Generally the exclusions does not include, for example, a personal injury settlement amount given directly to a person in the household. In order to avoid problems with SSI recipients, if a person in the household obtains a monetary settlement or the SSI recipient will be obtaing a settlement amount then one should seek out an attorney who can advise on a Special Needs Trust. 

Visit http://www.brandonssa.com/

“A proceeding of relative formality, generally public,with definite issues of fact or of law to be tried….takes place before magistrates clothed with judicial functions….and to hearings before administrative agencies as conducted by a hearing examiner or Administrative Law Judge.”

The Reconsideration “Hearing” is not a hearing as defined by any measure of the word. Meaning, the SSA agent does not outline issues of “facts or law” which will be addressed, there is no Judge present, there are no experts present, there are no medical personnel present, there is not a third party hearing monitor/recorder present and in general, we believe that the so called “hearing” is a detriment to attend since the adjudicator, who is not a lawyer, magistrate nor Judge, can paraphrase your statements and take words out of context to deny your claim and can further hinder your claim when you go before an actual Judge who will read the findings of the adjudicator.

The author in the past has attended many so called Reconsideration “Hearings” and each time, SSA either failed to provide a certified interpreter, failed to hold the “Hearing” in an actual meeting room but, instead attempted to conduct the “hearing” through a 3 inch plexiglass bullet proof barrier, refused to allow videotaping of the hearing, refused to provide a transcript of the hearing, and refused to provide a certified court reporter/monitor at the “hearing”. For all these reasons and because each SSA office appears to have various unpredictable methods of conducting these “hearings” we believe a claimant’s due process rights are being infringed upon with attendance thereof.

Of course there are instances where a Reconsideration hearing may turn out with positive results. But on the whole the process of the Reconsideration hearing is a waste of time to include the Reconsideration level as a whole which denies claims at a rate of 89% and higher in many jurisdictions.

We would suggest that SSA call the so called hearing an “informal conference” and advise the claimant that he or she has the expensive burden to provide a recording thereof, i.e., court reporter.

“A proceeding of relative formality, generally public,with definite issues of fact or of law to be tried….takes place before magistrates clothed with judicial functions….and to hearings before administrative agencies as conducted by a hearing examiner or Administrative Law Judge.”

The Reconsideration “Hearing” is not a hearing as defined by any measure of the word. Meaning, the SSA agent does not outline issues of “facts or law” which will be addressed, there is no Judge present, there are no experts present, there are no medical personnel present, there is not a third party hearing monitor/recorder present and in general, we believe that the so called “hearing” is a detriment to attend since the adjudicator, who is not a lawyer, magistrate nor Judge, can paraphrase your statements and take words out of context to deny your claim and can further hinder your claim when you go before an actual Judge who will read the findings of the adjudicator.

The author in the past has attended many so called Reconsideration “Hearings” and each time, SSA either failed to provide a certified interpreter, failed to hold the “Hearing” in an actual meeting room but, instead attempted to conduct the “hearing” through a 3 inch plexiglass bullet proof barrier, refused to allow videotaping of the hearing, refused to provide a transcript of the hearing, and refused to provide a certified court reporter/monitor at the “hearing”. For all these reasons and because each SSA office appears to have various unpredictable methods of conducting these “hearings” we believe a claimant’s due process rights are being infringed upon with attendance thereof.

Of course there are instances where a Reconsideration hearing may turn out with positive results. But on the whole the process of the Reconsideration hearing is a waste of time to include the Reconsideration level as a whole which denies claims at a rate of 89% and higher in many jurisdictions.

We would suggest that SSA call the so called hearing an “informal conference” and advise the claimant that he or she has the  expensive burden to provide a recording thereof, i.e., court reporter.

For more SSA information please see our archive Blogs.