FAQ/Help |
Calendar |
Search |
Today's Posts |
02-08-2011, 08:56 AM | #11 | |||
|
||||
Senior Member
|
I think legalmania is correct and SS has found the return to work as "substantial income".
I believe there is 9 months of substantial activity (does not have to be consecutive) where income over the "limit" can be made without change to benefits awarded. After that time, they may find you are able to continue work and the benefits will stop. You said the award was May of 2010. They may be waiting for the 9 months of substantial income to be fulfilled and then plan to change the award. I'm too new to this forum (but not the medical problems or disability) to post links, but SSA has links about the rules when working and when working changes your benefits. The lawyer gets paid on the award decision, not whether you keep getting benefits. I'm glad he was able to return to work. |
|||
02-08-2011, 09:03 AM | #12 | ||
|
|||
n/a
|
Quote:
|
||
02-08-2011, 09:13 AM | #13 | ||
|
|||
n/a
|
Quote:
Last edited by legalmania; 02-08-2011 at 12:10 PM. |
||
02-08-2011, 09:57 AM | #14 | ||
|
|||
Member
|
Neither the local office nor the payment center have the authority to overturn a favorable decision by an ALJ. Since the ALJ addressed the trial work months in the decision, that is a closed issue. Since the attorney was paid something, SSA has to have computed an amount of retroactive benefits since the attorney gets a percentage of that. If there were no retroactive benefits, the attorney would not have been paid anything.
So the problem is not with the work activity; it is not an attack on the disabled by the big bad Social Security Administration; there is another systems related problem that the payment center has not yet fixed. I would try going to your local office and talking to a supervisor who may be able to make a phone call on your behalf. Bring all your correspondence, including the award letter and the ALJ decision. Did he ever get worker's comp or other state disability benefits? Bring those proofs. I am still guessing a denied SSI claim created an erroneous windfall offset indicator. I think attorneys do have a resonsiblity to make sure the claimant is paid the money they are due. What good is a favorable decision to you if you get no money? But your contract with the attorney may not include any legal help after a favorable decision. He got his due, but you are on your own to get your due. Remember that when someone asks your for an opinion about this attorney. He doesn't help you get across the finish line. |
||
02-08-2011, 12:08 PM | #15 | ||
|
|||
n/a
|
O.K. I found the answer. The ALJ decision is not the final decision in the agency. I should know this because I've done it.
https://secure.ssa.gov/apps10/poms.nsf/lnx/0457550060 |
||
02-08-2011, 12:14 PM | #16 | ||
|
|||
n/a
|
Quote:
|
||
02-08-2011, 10:59 PM | #17 | ||
|
|||
Member
|
Quote:
DSI is a now largely abandoned process for changing the way disability decisions were made. It was the pet project of the previous Social Security Commissioner. The DRB may still be active in some parts of the country, I believe the northeast. But the final decisionmaker in the Social Security Administration is still the Appeals Council, the level above the ALJ. They only reverse a tiny percentage of cases brought before them and they take a year or two to even make that decision. If the Appeals Council does not approve or remand a case back to the ALJ, then the claimant can go outside SSA and file a civil case in a District Court. The lower level cannot reverse a decision made by a higher level. The payment center cannot change an ALJ award. The payment center or local office can refer a case to their regional office staff if a glaring error or misapplication of law (like granting insured status when there isn't any) was made in the written decision to see if the regional office is willing to bump the case up to the Appeals Council. But that almost never happens. So even if a lower level employee thinks the ALJ made a bad decision, the lower level employee cannot unilaterally change that decision. They don't have the authority. |
||
02-08-2011, 11:00 PM | #18 | ||
|
|||
Member
|
|
||
02-09-2011, 09:27 PM | #19 | ||
|
|||
n/a
|
Quote:
U.S. legal system In the United States, which uses a common law system in its state courts and to a lesser extent in its federal courts, the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals has stated: Stare decisis is the policy of the court to stand by precedent; the term is but an abbreviation of stare decisis et quieta non movere — "to stand by and adhere to decisions and not disturb what is settled." Consider the word "decisis." The word means, literally and legally, the decision. Nor is the doctrine stare dictis; it is not "to stand by or keep to what was said." Nor is the doctrine stare rationibus decidendi — "to keep to the rationes decidendi of past cases." Rather, under the doctrine of stare decisis a case is important only for what it decides — for the "what," not for the "why," and not for the "how." Insofar as precedent is concerned, stare decisis is important only for the decision, for the detailed legal consequence following a detailed set of facts.[5] When dealing with an agency it's a whole different ballgame. Introduction to Problem: A private/individual party is affected by an agency action. That party wants a court to review the agency’s action, pursuant to § 706 of the APA. The agency will immediately file a motion to dismiss, claiming that its decision cannot be reviewed under the APA. If the agency action can be reviewed, however, the reviewing court can reach the merits of the party’s claim—that there is something wrong with the agency action. |
||
02-09-2011, 10:25 PM | #20 | ||
|
|||
Member
|
Quote:
What is false? A lower level component can change the decision made by a higher component? The higher level decides to send it back to the lower level for a modification or clarification. That doesn't mean the lower level can change the decision made by the higher level. If I want to keep my job, I can't change the decision made by my supervisor nor can my supervisor change the decision made by the manager and the manager cannot change the decision made by the CEO. But this is my last post on the subject. |
||
Closed Thread |
|
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Forum | |||
Neurologix Announces Successful Phase 2 Trial of Gene Therapy for Parkinson's Disease | Parkinson's Disease | |||
Successful one year gene therapy trial announced by Neurologix | Parkinson's Disease |