Originally Posted by LIT LOVE

In an earlier post said you applied for SSDI in 2006 when you were 50 and you were denied by the Appeal's Council. Although you filed the paperwork for Federal Court you never responded and let that court case lapse. You then filed a second application in 2008 when you were 52.

In this thread you said your attorney amended your Alleged Onset Date to 2009, which would put your age at 53. Why did your attorney amend the Alleged Onset Date? Did you have more medical evidence at that point? Did you have a decrease of function, or a decline in your health?

Out of curiosity, do you know what your Date Last Insured is? If so, did you turn 55 beforehand? If you're unsure, it's important to figure this out before your hearing.

"I think they were just trying to do something to appease these people." I'm not sure what you mean by that.

"Why do you think they sent me for IQ And Memory Scale test? By the way, my scores were very low." If these tests were also performed in the past, which I believe you stated they were, than perhaps they wanted to compare the results. Without reading your file and knowing the specifics of your case, it's difficult to answer some of these questions, but it is not at all unusual for SS to require applicants to undergo exams or tests when they feel that your medical records are insufficient.

For example, you stated your docs filled out multiple sets of RFC forms for you. Did you undergo Functional Capacity Testing that your docs used as a reference to fill out those RFC forms?

You've listed several ailments contributing to your being disabled. But, the ALJ is going to want to know very specifically what are the limitations caused by each. She is going to want to see evidence that you are actively seeking treatment and are compliant with recommended treatment.

With the issue in this latest test questioning your credibility, I think it is highly unlikely you'll be approved prior to the hearing. The ALJ will very likely use the hearing to try to determine if your testimony is consistent with the record. She could spend three hours with you and thoroughly go through your case file...I would not make the assumption that only one or two questions need to be addressed.