At my last hearing I presented three RFC's, one from my orthopedist, neurologist, and my internal medicine guy. All three were longtime treating physicians, the RFC's detailed documents, fully supportive of my claim...

I lost, with the ALJ choosing to virtually completely ignore them, instead lending all weight to the SSA hack who had never so much as seen my face, let alone examined me.

But attorneys seem to like having the RFC's....

Sounds like you're damn if you do, damned if you don't Direwolf.

My advocate says that you never know what the SSDI person is like (or what kind of day they are having) when they review your paperwork. Says if mine is on the 'fence' for approval they may 'approve' because they denied the last 20 they looked at and then again....maybe not.

I pretty much believe this. My son works in law enforcement and when he was on patrol and in a bad mood he was more likely to stop someone. He says he sees it in the courtroom all the time. Judge is having a bad day, sick or mad at their husband/wife and take it out on the people that appear before them.

Of course I did tell my son not to be hard on people because he was mad at his wife

Debi from Georgia

Remember you would be paying for Functional Capacity Testing and an RFC, which is harder to dismiss, at least that was the reaction by SS, IMO.

Dear Direwolf,

Did you persue your case any further after being denied at the hearing level? What explanation did they give for your denial? They are suppose to give MORE weight to your "treating" physicians than any physician that has not seen you, the SSA doc that reviewed your file. Where do you stand now?

I've been pursuing my claim's since 2003, which includes 7 consecutive denials until prevailing against SSA in federal court this past winter, with notification from the federal judge coming my way in July!

The federal judge didn't even mention the ALJ giving more weight to the SSA hack in his ruling, in fact he turned him over on a ridiculous technicality pertaining to some silly job description thing. If not for that, it appears he'd have upheld the ALJ's original decision, which was just a black outrage.

My three RFC's were highly detailed, and completely supportive of my claim, I recall them being at least seven pages each. The neurologist charged me $500.00 for his contribution, the other two were simply done with no charge beyond the office visit required to deliver them into the doctors hands.

My attorney at that time did an awful job, he failed to obtain my full medical files, even after three face to face meetings in which it was explained to him that he did not have all of my files, and he assured me that he would obtain them. He also failed to brief me on the importance of the RFC's, I only found out about them 60 days out from the hearing(the neurologist books appointments 6-months out), I literally handed two of them over to the attorney in the hearing room, the day of the hearing! This did not sit well with the ALJ(Gaffney out of MLPS MN)who very obviously had made up his mind about my case well before I had entered his hearing room.

So RFC's are complicated, the attorneys love them, but they are absolutely no assurance of victory, and in my case they were completely ignored, which obviously was devastating. Despite overwhelming evidence supporting my claim, the ALJ chose to ignore them, he even went as far as stating in his decision that my doctors were lying! An absolute black outrage....

My advice is to obtain the RFC, but more importantly check out your ALJ's record, and don't allow your attorney to destroy your case through incompetence, you really have to watch them closely, they will lie to you over and over and over again, you just have to be intensively involved, YOU must physically verify that they have all of your records, they will deceive you on this count. You have to look at it from the attorneys perspective, they only can earn a max of about $6,000, and most of them will only prepare for your case a week or two out from the hearing, if that! My first attorney gave the strong impression of having not prepared at all, showing up at the hearing office with a a few notes scribbled on the cover of a palm sized notepad, she didn't even know my first name...

Hi Direwolf,

Thanks for the scoop. I really do wish you well.

My hearing is next week. I have "control issues" so I left nothing to my attorney. I got my files, I got the Medical Source Statements, and I made a list of important points to make or clarify.

You are correct that the amount of $ is not a strong incentive but getting ZERO is worth nothing. I would hope that the max of $6K vs Zero should be some incentive.

The way these attorneys work is to bulk up on clients, 20 client cases translates to however many approvals, its strictly a numbers game. They don't want to lose, but for that kind of dough they are only prepared to do so much. If your case is complicated, as mine is, they can hurt you badly by not knowing the file....

Good luck....

You won your appeal on a procedural error--a positive thing, and easier to prove than the ALJ made the wrong decision based upon the medical evidence. SSDI/SSI rulings are based upon medical/legal evaluations. Those technicalities often mean the difference between a Fully Favorable Decision and a Denial.

The DOT (Dictionary of Occupational Titles) was written in 1986 and the job descriptions as written can seem insanely outdated, but that doesn't change the reality that is what a Vocational Expert uses to determine if you are capable of working.

A I mentioned previously in the thread, some ALJ's don't trust the credibility of a RFC without a Functional Capacity Evaluation...

The VE's are really a joke, unfortunately not a good one! I do hope its a positive thing, I've been waging this fight for ten years, I am at the end, one way or another this is going to be it.

I'll tell you what I'm afraid of, I share the opinion of a few SSDI experts who believe that the SSA sees a cancer diagnosis and they purposely target them, knowing that the odds are quite good that they can outlast them through the process.

I do believe that....