true
Full Member
Posts: 81 
|
Post by true on Oct 8, 2013 8:12:50 GMT -5
I am sure that some people will not like my suggestions. But, I think that West VA ODAR judges and most of the staff were complacent with the status quo. This probably is not so different from other ODARs. Therefore, I suggest that ODAR mandatorily either transfer their HOCALJ or their HOD every 6 years from office to office.
To reduce the backlog and cost of frivolous claims, ODAR can require attorney reps to pay court costs. Also, they should allow judges to sanction attorneys for not submitting late evidence without good cause, etc..
|
|
|
|
Post by moopigsdad on Oct 8, 2013 8:29:21 GMT -5
I am sure that some people will not like my suggestions. But, I think that West VA ODAR judges and most of the staff were complacent with the status quo. This probably is not so different from other ODARs. Therefore, I suggest that ODAR mandatorily either transfer their HOCALJ or their HOD every 6 years from office to office. To reduce the backlog and cost of frivolous claims, ODAR can require attorney reps to pay court costs. Also, they should allow judges to sanction attorneys for not submitting late evidence without good cause, etc.. If you change frivolous above to fraudulent I agree, otherwise you will have a lot of attorneys backing off some more difficult disability cases causing many claimants to go in unrepresented at the hearing. What is frivolous and how is it defined? Are you going to let each ALJ determine what is frivolous? I think there are way too many problems with that suggestion, but the rest of the suggestions may be able to work. However, I am not so sure many HOCALJs and HODs wajnt to transfer every six years, if required. |
|
|
|
Post by chessparent on Oct 8, 2013 8:39:52 GMT -5
Or, if they really want to fix the problem, they could offer me an ALJ position.
|
|
|
|
Post by maquereau on Oct 8, 2013 9:04:34 GMT -5
Truly, the best things they could do to minimize fraud would be to (1) give ALJs more time to review their cases before issuing decisions; (2) periodically review the work of particular judges who have statistically interesting profiles; (3) be willing to prosecute and make public examples of those who have committed perjury or related offenses in the disability process.
|
|
|
|
Post by Gaidin on Oct 8, 2013 9:25:10 GMT -5
Or, if they really want to fix the problem, they could offer me an ALJ position. Me too! I will work really hard to fix the problem. |
|
|
|
Post by chessparent on Oct 8, 2013 9:43:16 GMT -5
You and me against the world, Gaidan!!
|
|
|
|
Post by moopigsdad on Oct 8, 2013 9:45:48 GMT -5
Truly, the best things they could do to minimize fraud would be to (1) give ALJs more time to review their cases before issuing decisions; (2) periodically review the work of particular judges who have statistically interesting profiles; (3) be willing to prosecute and make public examples of those who have committed perjury or related offenses in the disability process. I love every suggestion you make maque and they would go a long way in fixing the system.  |
|
|
|
Post by 71stretch on Oct 8, 2013 9:49:42 GMT -5
Compelling all HODs and HOCALJs to transfer seems like extreme overkill. It sends a message that ODAR thinks they will all end up acting inappropriately in some way by getting cozy with people they shouldn't, or getting complacent in some respect, if they stay in one place too long. A giant game of musical chairs just seems really unnecessary to solve a problem of lax oversight that may exist only on a very small scale, if at all.
|
|
|
|
Post by BagLady on Oct 8, 2013 11:59:46 GMT -5
I am sure that some people will not like my suggestions. But, I think that West VA ODAR judges and most of the staff were complacent with the status quo. This probably is not so different from other ODARs. Therefore, I suggest that ODAR mandatorily either transfer their HOCALJ or their HOD every 6 years from office to office. I disagree that the "WV ODAR judges and most of the staff were complacent with the status quo." There were people repeatedly reporting violations of procedures (timekeeping, reassignment of files, etc.) and upper management (outside of WV) was aware of the complaints. Something should have been done rather than promoting the HOCALJ. The problems in WV were a symptom of the disease, not the disease itself. |
|
|
|
Post by redsox1 on Oct 8, 2013 15:52:43 GMT -5
Not everything is fraud. There are tons of studies about the effect of secondary gain on recovery time. if your best option is disability, your brain can trick you into believing that you are disabled. My top recommendations would be 1) add 5 years to the grids; 2) charge a fee for filing and appealing; 3) eliminate the burden shift at Step 5.
|
|
|
|
Post by arkstfan on Oct 8, 2013 16:28:36 GMT -5
Not everything is fraud. There are tons of studies about the effect of secondary gain on recovery time. if your best option is disability, your brain can trick you into believing that you are disabled. My top recommendations would be 1) add 5 years to the grids; 2) charge a fee for filing and appealing; 3) eliminate the burden shift at Step 5. At least add two years. The GRID whend adopted presumed employers won't do certain things for a person within 15 years or 10 years or 5 years of retirement. The retirement age has moved two years so those presumptions are now 17, 12, and 7 years prior to retirement. The change in retirement age without a change in the GRID has changed the underlying presumptions of the GRID. |
|
|
|
Post by mcb on Oct 8, 2013 16:33:21 GMT -5
charge a fee for filing and appealing Really? How much to file and appeal? Should SSI be eliminated? What if your poor, have never worked and your IQ is in the 50s? Low 6os? |
|
|
|
Post by bartleby on Oct 8, 2013 16:37:52 GMT -5
One small area to watch for is the illiteracy area. I have seen cases where someone with a Ph.D. from another country was considered illiterate and got paid on the GRID. Although that is not common, there are a lot of taxi drivers that claim illiteracy during hearings.. I also see people from foreign countries that have been in our country for 10-15 years earning SGA and they claimant they can't speak English and need an interpreter at the hearing.. After a hearing, the VHR told me that the claimant corrected the interpreter and said "That is not what the Judge said for you to ask me." You can't make thses stories up folds. It would be nice if we could get fraud investigations easier and quicker than now.
|
|
|
|
Post by redsox1 on Oct 8, 2013 17:21:01 GMT -5
Not sure where I recommended getting rid of ssi in my post. As for the filing fee, it is my belief that a fee, to clarify for requesting an ALJ hearing and AC appeal, is not unreasonable. Fair point about never having worked. As for IQ score, in my jurisdiction, 12.05 is basically gutted and we look at adaptive skills not only IQ because some docs give ridiculously low scores. Not to say that no one has MR but usually if we see a 50 it's because DDE saw lots of adaptive skills despite a low score.
|
|
|
|
Post by mcb on Oct 8, 2013 18:19:37 GMT -5
BTW, what's Fruad?
|
|
|
|
Post by Ace Midnight on Oct 8, 2013 18:24:38 GMT -5
Not everything is fraud. There are tons of studies about the effect of secondary gain on recovery time. if your best option is disability, your brain can trick you into believing that you are disabled. My top recommendations would be 1) add 5 years to the grids; 2) charge a fee for filing and appealing; 3) eliminate the burden shift at Step 5. I like all of these suggestions. I would also like administrative contempt power for the ALJ. The ALJ should be able to levy fines against future rep fees, temporarily suspend (or recommend for permanent bar to practicing before the administration) for misconduct, repeated late submissions, argumentative or disrespectful attitude, etc. This would re-establish the ALJ as an authority figure, within the ODAR universe, anyway, and make him/her less of bank vault door. Just my $0.02 (and I was a rep for 5 years.) |
|
|
|
Post by philliesfan on Oct 8, 2013 18:44:32 GMT -5
No matter what system is devised and no matter what controls are implemented, there will always be fraud and abuse. It's just the nature of some people. There are unscrupulous doctors and lawyers out there, not to mention claimant's trying to game the system. There is no fraud proof adjudicatory process involving medical issues. Just look at the IMEs in Worker's Compensation claims. There are reports from doctors for the insurance carriers who find nothing wrong with an individual, and doctors for the injured worker who find that they are almost a vegetable. The insurance companies and the bar know who they are. At least at SSA, our CE physicians are supposed to give independent reports and assessments.
|
|
|
|
Post by moopigsdad on Oct 8, 2013 19:07:15 GMT -5
No matter what system is devised and no matter what controls are implemented, there will always be fraud and abuse. It's just the nature of some people. There are unscrupulous doctors and lawyers out there, not to mention claimant's trying to game the system. There is no fraud proof adjudicatory process involving medical issues. Just look at the IMEs in Worker's Compensation claims. There are reports from doctors for the insurance carriers who find nothing wrong with an individual, and doctors for the injured worker who find that they are almost a vegetable. The insurance companies and the bar know who they are. At least at SSA, our CE physicians are supposed to give independent reports and assessments. I am glad you used the term "supposed to give" because as a representative for close to 30 years I can tell you a lot of those IME are written by physicians who want to remain on the list of physicians used by SSA, so a lot of them tailor their reports in order to get future IMEs. Some are fair, but a lot are not. I have received eight page reports from an IME physician who literally spent ten minutes with the client and the report lists someone of the wrong sex and age and is a duplicate of a report with minor changes from an IME report from the same physician done on a previous client six months earlier. |
|
|
|
Post by lildavey on Oct 8, 2013 19:35:27 GMT -5
No matter what system is devised and no matter what controls are implemented, there will always be fraud and abuse. It's just the nature of some people. There are unscrupulous doctors and lawyers out there, not to mention claimant's trying to game the system. There is no fraud proof adjudicatory process involving medical issues. Just look at the IMEs in Worker's Compensation claims. There are reports from doctors for the insurance carriers who find nothing wrong with an individual, and doctors for the injured worker who find that they are almost a vegetable. The insurance companies and the bar know who they are. At least at SSA, our CE physicians are supposed to give independent reports and assessments. I am glad you used the term "supposed to give" because as a representative for close to 30 years I can tell you a lot of those IME are written by physicians who want to remain on the list of physicians used by SSA, so a lot of them tailor their reports in order to get future IMEs. Some are fair, but a lot are not. I have received eight page reports from an IME physician who literally spent ten minutes with the client and the report lists someone of the wrong sex and age and is a duplicate of a report with minor changes from an IME report from the same physician done on a previous client six months earlier. Sounds like those reports Eric Conn had generated. |
|
|
|
Post by lurker/dibs on Oct 8, 2013 21:03:31 GMT -5
I think if you charge a filing fee you will eliminate legal services and other charitable organizations from representing claimants. And if you allow someone to file for a waiver of the fee based on income/net worth, then about 95% of my clients wouldn't have to pay it. Furthermore, some ALJs have a pay rate of 10% so you couldn't even have the rep repaid from the claimants past due benefits. Plus, I can't say how many cases I have done essentially for free or at a loss because there was no back pay. If I had to pay a filing fee it would discourage me from taking some of the more difficult cases. And what about those claimants who disappear during the waiting game? I'd be out that filing fee for that missing claimant.
I think more authority to the ALJ is an excellent idea. I personally know of several attorneys who do not request medical records until after a hearing. Sanctioning this behavior of the attorney would help solve this problem, while not harming the claimant. I know several judges at a particular ODAR who routinely reduce attorney fees to reps who are obviously not prepared, have submitted no medical records when some clearly exist, who have obviously never met with their clients before the day of the hearing, etc. whether that is within the rules or not, Idk. But from what I have heard, it has helped.
|
|
