Disability insurance companies are working remotely because of the pandemic, which has slowed down the processing of claims. Nonetheless, decisions are getting made.
We represent a 60 year old finance manager from Glen Cove with cancer whose Disability Insurance (“DI”) application was approved by Mutual of Omaha. We also represent a 55 year old business analyst from North Babylon with back problems whose Long Term Disability (“LTD”) application was approved by MetLife.
Navigating the claims process is more cumbersome during the pandemic, and requires more effort than usual. Obtaining medical records when doctors’ offices are barely staffed is difficult, and claimants even have trouble being able to schedule appointments.
It is risky for an insured to try to navigate a disability insurance claim on their own. While it may
seem the insurance company is on your side, they are not. Please
feel free to call my office for a free phone consultation. We are
conveniently located on Long Island in Nassau and Suffolk counties.
Wednesday, May 27, 2020
Wednesday, May 20, 2020
What Was DDS Thinking
Sometimes the decision of the State agency adjudicator makes absolutely no sense. I represent a 54 year old school aide from East Meadow who suffered broken legs, neck, shoulder, ribs, arm, and multiple vertebrae with a TBI in a car vehicle accident on August 6, 2016, which was the alleged onset date (“AOD”). A State agency adjudicator named K. Vollmer said the claimant did not become disabled until February 7, 2018, which was the established onset date (“EOD”).
There was absolutely no evidence that the claimant’s medical condition got worse between the AOD and EOD. Common sense and logic dictate that the claimant’s condition would be worse immediately after the car accident, not two years later. If you ask a Kindergartner if a person would feel better right after a car accident, or two years later, I would bet everything I had that they would correctly answer the latter.
To make matters even worse, J. Diaz, a second State agency adjudicator, “thoroughly reviewed” the claimant’s file, and nonetheless, concluded that Vollmer was correct. It would seem highly unlikely that two people could independently arrive at the same moronic conclusion. It is more likely that Diaz blindly rubberstamped Vollmer’s decision.
Thankfully, administrative law judge (“ALJ”) Andrew Weiss ended the travesty. Upon reviewing the file, the ALJ determined that a hearing was not necessary, and approved the claimant’s Social Security Disability benefits. Unfortunately, the claimant had to wait over a year before the ALJ could correct the State agency’s obvious error.
My client initially applied on her own, believing that she would be approved easily, but was denied almost immediately. She was referred to me by her husband, a former client for whom we obtained SSD benefits. They are both very appreciative because they were unaware that they could appeal the onset date. This is another example of why it is important to retain a disability attorney if you plan on applying for SSD benefits. Please feel free to call my office for a free phone consultation. The office is currently closed due to the pandemic, but we are still able to take phone calls and work remotely. Our offices are conveniently located in both Nassau and Suffolk counties on Long Island.
There was absolutely no evidence that the claimant’s medical condition got worse between the AOD and EOD. Common sense and logic dictate that the claimant’s condition would be worse immediately after the car accident, not two years later. If you ask a Kindergartner if a person would feel better right after a car accident, or two years later, I would bet everything I had that they would correctly answer the latter.
To make matters even worse, J. Diaz, a second State agency adjudicator, “thoroughly reviewed” the claimant’s file, and nonetheless, concluded that Vollmer was correct. It would seem highly unlikely that two people could independently arrive at the same moronic conclusion. It is more likely that Diaz blindly rubberstamped Vollmer’s decision.
Thankfully, administrative law judge (“ALJ”) Andrew Weiss ended the travesty. Upon reviewing the file, the ALJ determined that a hearing was not necessary, and approved the claimant’s Social Security Disability benefits. Unfortunately, the claimant had to wait over a year before the ALJ could correct the State agency’s obvious error.
My client initially applied on her own, believing that she would be approved easily, but was denied almost immediately. She was referred to me by her husband, a former client for whom we obtained SSD benefits. They are both very appreciative because they were unaware that they could appeal the onset date. This is another example of why it is important to retain a disability attorney if you plan on applying for SSD benefits. Please feel free to call my office for a free phone consultation. The office is currently closed due to the pandemic, but we are still able to take phone calls and work remotely. Our offices are conveniently located in both Nassau and Suffolk counties on Long Island.
Tuesday, May 5, 2020
SSD Backlog
Statistics from the Social Security Administration ("SSA") show that working from home has increased federal employees' productivity, and actually reduced the backlog at the SSA local offices. So even though the employees from the local SSA offices are working from home, they are still processing new applications and appeals. Unfortunately, the same cannot be said for the State agency, who make the initial decision for Social Security, as they seem to be at a stand still.
COVID-19 Disability
According to a Johns Hopkins expert on lung disease, COVID-19, the disease caused by the new coronavirus, can cause lasting lung damage in at least three ways.
COVID-19 can lead to acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS), a form of lung failure, where patients are often unable to breath on their own and may require ventilator support to help circulate oxygen in the body. People who survive ARDS and recover from COVID-19 may have lasting pulmonary scarring.
COVID-19 can also lead to sepsis when an infection spreads through the bloodstream, causing tissue damage everywhere it goes. Sepsis, even when survived, can leave a patient with lasting damage to the lungs and other organs.
Because COVID-19 makes the immune system work hard to fight it, COVID-19 leaves the person more vulnerable to a different disease, which can result in additional lung damage. Permanent lung damage can adversely affect the ability to work. Like any chronic lung disease, the after effects of COVID-19 can result in severe fatigue that precludes even the easiest full time work.
If you suffer from a respiratory or lung disease, whether it's COVID-19 related or not, and you are unable to work, please feel free to contact my office for a free phone consultation.
COVID-19 can lead to acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS), a form of lung failure, where patients are often unable to breath on their own and may require ventilator support to help circulate oxygen in the body. People who survive ARDS and recover from COVID-19 may have lasting pulmonary scarring.
COVID-19 can also lead to sepsis when an infection spreads through the bloodstream, causing tissue damage everywhere it goes. Sepsis, even when survived, can leave a patient with lasting damage to the lungs and other organs.
Because COVID-19 makes the immune system work hard to fight it, COVID-19 leaves the person more vulnerable to a different disease, which can result in additional lung damage. Permanent lung damage can adversely affect the ability to work. Like any chronic lung disease, the after effects of COVID-19 can result in severe fatigue that precludes even the easiest full time work.
If you suffer from a respiratory or lung disease, whether it's COVID-19 related or not, and you are unable to work, please feel free to contact my office for a free phone consultation.
Tuesday, April 28, 2020
SS Hearings
Social Security ("SS") hearings are normally held at the claimant's assigned hearing office. Due to the pandemic, SS has been giving claimant's the choice of postponing their hearing, or agreeing to a telephonic hearing. SS has announced that they are extending this process through August. If you have a hearing scheduled, you should contact your hearing office to advise them whether or not you agree to a telephonic hearing, or if you want to postpone your hearing.
Friday, April 24, 2020
Some Good News!
This just out! Finally, some good news from the Social Security Administration. The Social Security Board of Trustees has just reported that the Disability Insurance Trust Fund will be able to pay full benefits until at least 2065, not 2035 as they had previously reported.
Wednesday, April 15, 2020
Medical Consultant C. Levit
According to Social Security, C. Levit is a medical consultant for the New York State agency, who specializes in internal medicine. According to the New York State Department of Health, the only licensed physician in New York with the last name Levit and first initial C, is Charles D. Levit, who coincidentally is an internist.
I represent a 58 year old from Levittown that used to drive for car services, who applied for Social Security Disability (“SSD”) benefits due to cardiovascular problems. A board certified cardiologist, Thierry Duchatellier, Chief of Cardiology at Mercy medical Center, provided narrative and functionality reports stating that the claimant was disabled based upon the objective diagnostic testing and treatment records, which were also provided.
Levit reviewed the claimant’s medical records. Levit asserted that the claimant’s medical sources, including Dr. Duchatellier, were not contacted because “Prior experience raises a question as to the objectivity, accuracy, or validity of the evidence from the medical source(s).” Levit failed to identify the medical source or sources whose prior experience was questioned. However, the claimant’s medical sources said they had no prior experience with the State agency.
I advised the administrative law judge (“ALJ”) that Levit’s boilerplate statement that, “Prior experience raises a question as to the objectivity, accuracy, or validity of the evidence from the medical source(s)” – was fraudulent and defamatory. The statement must be boilerplate because I have seen it in other SSD files. I requested a subpoena for the attendance of Levit at the claimant’s hearing for cross examination, and that the ALJ notify the Agency’s Inspector General about the potential misconduct.
In this instance, the fraudulent and defamatory was not addressed since the ALJ will be issuing a fully favorable decision. However, such assertions should not be ignored, and in my opinion, claimants should insist on the right to cross examine anyone who makes libelous representations.
I represent a 58 year old from Levittown that used to drive for car services, who applied for Social Security Disability (“SSD”) benefits due to cardiovascular problems. A board certified cardiologist, Thierry Duchatellier, Chief of Cardiology at Mercy medical Center, provided narrative and functionality reports stating that the claimant was disabled based upon the objective diagnostic testing and treatment records, which were also provided.
Levit reviewed the claimant’s medical records. Levit asserted that the claimant’s medical sources, including Dr. Duchatellier, were not contacted because “Prior experience raises a question as to the objectivity, accuracy, or validity of the evidence from the medical source(s).” Levit failed to identify the medical source or sources whose prior experience was questioned. However, the claimant’s medical sources said they had no prior experience with the State agency.
I advised the administrative law judge (“ALJ”) that Levit’s boilerplate statement that, “Prior experience raises a question as to the objectivity, accuracy, or validity of the evidence from the medical source(s)” – was fraudulent and defamatory. The statement must be boilerplate because I have seen it in other SSD files. I requested a subpoena for the attendance of Levit at the claimant’s hearing for cross examination, and that the ALJ notify the Agency’s Inspector General about the potential misconduct.
In this instance, the fraudulent and defamatory was not addressed since the ALJ will be issuing a fully favorable decision. However, such assertions should not be ignored, and in my opinion, claimants should insist on the right to cross examine anyone who makes libelous representations.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
