by Susan Golden
There used to be a time, years ago, when it seemed like the State agency representatives actually did their jobs. Now those representatives, including supervisors, are far and few between.
We represent a 59 year old videographer from Floral Park, who suffers from severe arthritis in both of his hips, as well as severe anxiety and depression. We filed his application for Social Security Disability ("SSD") benefits in October of 2022. In January of 2023, we alerted Social Security that our claimant was in dire financial need, and was in danger of losing his home. If someone is at risk of being homeless, or having their utilities turned off, Social Security is supposed to expedite the claim. When the application is dire need, instead of the usual 6-7 months to make a decision, Social Security is obligated to prioritize the claim, and make a decision as quickly as possible.
It took more than a year before our claimant's SSD application was finally approved. It is absolutely horrific that a claim that was supposed to be expedited, was not a priority to anyone at the Stage agency; not to the analyst handling the claim, not to the analyst’s supervisor, not to the supervisor’s supervisor. We did our job by providing the State agency with all of the medical and vocational evidence necessary to make a quick decision. They simply did not do their job.
We have access to the claimant’s efile, just as the analysts at the State agency do. We upload the evidence electronically into the efile, and can view that evidence just as the analyst and supervisor's handling the claim can. However, the State agency analysts let cases sit in limbo for months, and then claim that the medical evidence we submitted, which was timely when we submitted it, is “stale” or “not current enough.” The State agency told us that they consider any records more than three months old to be “stale.” However, they fail to return our calls. When they finally do call us, they claim they cannot see the evidence we submitted, even though we can see it in the same efile. Alternatively, they purposely delay returning our calls, and/or responding to our letters, for over three months so they can claim the evidence is too old. It is a vicious cycle, with no consequences or repercussion for their intentional mishandling of disability claims.
In this case, we submitted a letter four times from the claimant’s landlord that the claimant was in danger of being evicted for not paying his rent. The first letter was submitted in January of 2023, a year ago. We submitted letters from the claimant's utility companies that his water and electricity were being turned off. We repeatedly escalated the matter, calling supervisor after supervisor, going up the ladder, trying to find someone who would do something! Even after we reached a supervisor who seemed willing to help, it still took another month for our claimant's SSD benefits to be approved.
Our claimant is very appreciative that we fought for him and were successful in obtaining his SSD benefits. We will continue to fight for our clients, and hope that we can put pressure on Social Security to change their broken, outdated system, and hire people who actually care about doing their job.
No comments:
Post a Comment