Quote:
Originally Posted by LIT LOVE
All I can say is that in some ways my experience was similar to yours. All of my medical evidence was via my WC case, which meant that I had an uphill battle since every month for years WC docs supplied reports misrepresenting my injury so as to deny me benefits.
Many SSDI attorneys spend relatively no prep work on their cases. I became so frustrated with my attorney (after receiving a Partially Favorable Decision) that I chose to handle my subsequent appeal and new claim pro se. It was not the easiest approach, and it did lengthen the process, but I did receive a Fully Favorable decision eventually.
I was allowed to ask the VE questions prior to my hearing and can not stress how significant his/her testimony is. I was beyond frustrated when by the end my VE claimed I could work as a Surveillance System Monitor,
which is a completely bogus job and no longer exists as written in the DOT in 1986. Had the ALJ not believed my credibility, he would have had a small if questionable way to deny me of benefits. If your last VE claimed your physical capacity would allow you to perform medium or light levels of work, than you have a harder battle. If he/she claimed you could perform only sedentary work, than you're not far from proving you're unable to perform any work. You can request a CD of your ALJ hearing/s btw.
If the Appeals Council ruled your doctors should have been given greater weight than the SS doc, than you'll be in good shape going into the new hearing, if this wasn't addressed, than I'd worry. While it maybe difficult to get additional documentation, it might be what you need. Is your WC claim still open or did you close your case? Do you have ongoing medical benefits?
|
Appeals council refused to even review his decision, it took a "real courtroom" to produce a result, aside from that, every single stage of the SSDI ladder was shuttered, also I was 50 at the time of the last ALJ hearing, but they forced me by some subterfuge into being 49! This was significant, that's because at 50 the onus is on them, and not you, my date of last insured has long since expired.
Why should I worry about Appeals council anyway, they didn't do a thing but rubber stamp Gaffney's totally corrupt decision. How can they do anything other then what the federal judge commands? SSA has not a single neurologist on staff as far as I know, how can it even be legal for a thug such as Gaffney to simply call your board certified experts liars, while elevating the testimony of some drug addicted hack, who likely cannot obtain a license to practice anyway?
I'd like that explained, I had three doctors, two of them specialists, all of whom had seen me for at least five years or more, but the SSA hack who did nothing but skim charts gets the nod?
That's profound corruption, its not even a debatable thing, lets see his credentials compared to the doctors I treated with?