i stoped working in 2005 i got hurt on the job i was turned down by ssdi many times so i started a new app. i got a letter stating i meet the requirements for ssdi from april 2010 on my 2006 ss statment it said if i became disabled i would get about 625.00 since i stoped working in 2006 would i get 625.00 or less.

I get SSD (Social Security Disability). Then there's SSI, I'm not 100% on what the I stands for, I think income but the two are completely different. With SSD, I believe it took an average of my last four years of income I made. However, I believe with SSD & SSI that there is a minimum payment somewhere around $600 where they won't pay you less than that a month. Plus it's retroactive, so your first payment should be a lump sum

FYI----It took me almost 3 yrs. with an air tight case to get social security disability, but part way thru I changed to a better lawyer, and that made all the difference. And basically everyone gets turned down the first time

Since SSDI is based on a formula using your average lifetime earnings, having several zero years (2005-2010) can reduce your average lifetime earnings so the estimate you got in 2005 is not valid for a disability onset date of 2010. But it depends on how many other zero or low years of earnings you have had in your lifetime because the lowest five are generally disregarded.

The answer to your question is, it depends. Best I can do.

It is incorrect that there is a minimum for SSDI. SSDI benefits can be less than $200 a month, more than $1500 a month. All depends upon lifetime earnings because it is based on what you put in.

The SSI (Supplemental Security Income) program is a totally separate program that can pay some money on top of the SSDI if your total income from all sources is low enough and the value of your assets is low enough. SSI federal benefits can be from $1 to $674. Your other income can include your SSDI, pensions, unemployment, gifts from family, free rent, earnings, gambling winnings, inheritances, etc. SSI is a low income, public assistance program that if you have not filed for it, you may want to get an official answer about whether or not you meet the income and resource rules.

It is also incorrect that everyone is denied the first claim that is filed. About 1 out of 3 initial applications are approved. That does mean 2 out of 3 are denied. But some of the denials include people who file because their LTD carrier requires it - not because they think they meet the rules. Some of the denials also are from people who think someone owes them money if they have a problem even if they don't come close to meeting the legal definition of disability. Other denials include claims filed by people who don't take the time to make a high quality claim (a doctor's last name with no address) and think that SSA will be able to find all the records and that the doctors will all respond. Then there are claims by people who are borderline disabled and get approved by lenient ALJ's. Then there are the people who are truly disabled who get denied until a lawyer writes a brief and puts all the evidence in a framework that shows the claimant meets the legal definition and convinces an ALJ.

Thanks for this. It is unfortunate that many who are uninformed believe that an attorney must be obtained prior to application for SSDI.

i had to wait 18mos before i could apply cause i was on "workmanComp"then i was fianally could apply for "SSDI".and even then i had to make sure i met up to the "Feds"definition on what is "disable".so it took me almost 3yrs

Don: An active WC file has no effect on applying for SSDI.

Ballerina: Every circumstance is different. For those with little or no backpay, that can actually find a good attorney, they won't pay out hardly any fee anyway. Other than a legally capped fee, there is no downside to using an attorney that I can think of other than having a personal issue with the legal profession. When the legal fee is the objection, as I've repeatedly said, there are non-profit legal services as well.

Please explain once and for all what your objections are to getting professional legal help?

For those with a psych component to their application or a mental disability claim, for those that are so ill that they're barely functioning in their daily lives, for those in denial of the true extent of their disability, for those that don't have family resources to fall back on, exploring extra legal help early on makes sense.

Just because someone's view is different than yours, doesn't make theirs automatically "uninformed" or incorrect. **

I am an example of a young person with a mental illness who was approved without an attorney on the first try. But I know that I'm the exception, not the rule, and LIT LOVE I agree with everything you've said regarding hiring a lawyer. However, I also think it is important to point out the issue that Ballerina touched upon: that not everyone needs an attorney, so it is misinformed to think that an attorney is necessary. When I did some initial research, I found that some sites said an attorney was necessary for being approved, and that is incorrect. It was only after considerable more research that I found out people had won without attorneys and I felt comfortable applying on my own. Most people though would benefit from an attorney's expertise.

PS I am new to this board so perhaps LIT LOVE you were responding to past comments, but as an outsider, I did not find this comment by Ballerina offensive in any way. I read Ballerina's comment as neutral. *

And work credits!