free_spirit_etc

Dave, I know I will not be much help on the legalities of your appeal. But I wanted you to know that my thoughts and prayers are with you and your children this Christmas. I remember being homeless and living in a shelter with my son once upon a time. It isn't easy - but you make it through. The other day my son was talking to some man that told him that he was homeless. My son, of course, gave the man a few bucks, because that is just the way my son is. And my son told me, "Isn't that sad that the man ended up homeless?" I told him, "Yes. It is sad the man is homeless, but he hasn't ended up yet. He is homeless right now, but who knows where he will be when he ends up." My thoughts and prayers are with you and your children - that you will get through this - and that you will end up just fine. Free

So this is what they are saying you can do: http://www.occupationalinfo.org/24/249587018.html CODE: 249.587-018Buy the DOT:Download/CD-ROM TITLE(s): DOCUMENT PREPARER, MICROFILMING (business ser.) Prepares documents, such as brochures, pamphlets, and catalogs, for microfilming, using paper cutter, photocopying machine, rubber stamps, and other work devices: Cuts documents into individual pages of standard microfilming size and format when allowed by margin space, using paper cutter or razor knife. Reproduces document pages as necessary to improve clarity or to reduce one or more pages into single page of standard microfilming size, using photocopying machine. Stamps standard symbols on pages or inserts instruction cards between pages of material to notify MICROFILM-CAMERA OPERATOR (business ser.) 976.682-022 of special handling, such as manual repositioning, during microfilming. Prepares cover sheet and document folder for material and index card for company files indicating information, such as firm name and address, product category, and index code, to identify material. Inserts material to be filmed in document folder and files folder for processing according to index code and filming priority schedule. GOE: 07.05.03 STRENGTH: S GED: R3 M1 L2 SVP: 2 DLU: 86 ONET CROSSWALK: 55347 General Office Clerks http://www.occupationalinfo.org/24/249362026.html CODE: 249.362-026Buy the DOT:Download/CD-ROM TITLE(s): ORDER CLERK (clerical) alternate titles: customer-order clerk; order filler; order taker Processes orders for material or merchandise received by mail, telephone, or personally from customer or company employee, manually or using computer or calculating machine: Edits orders received for price and nomenclature. Informs customer of unit prices, shipping date, anticipated delays, and any additional information needed by customer, using mail or telephone. Writes or types order form, or enters data into computer, to determine total cost for customer. Records or files copy of orders received according to expected delivery date. May ascertain credit rating of customer [CREDIT CLERK (clerical) 205.367-022]. May check inventory control and notify stock control departments of orders that would deplete stock. May initiate purchase requisitions. May route orders to departments for filling and follow up on orders to ensure delivery by specified dates and be designated Telephone-Order Dispatcher (clerical). May compute price, discount, sales representative's commission, and shipping charges. May prepare invoices and shipping documents, such as bill of lading [bILLING TYPIST (clerical) 214.382-014]. May recommend type of packing or labeling needed on order. May receive and check customer complaints [CUSTOMER-COMPLAINT CLERK (clerical) 241.367-014]. May confer with production, sales, shipping, warehouse, or common carrier personnel to expedite or trace missing or delayed shipments. May attempt to sell additional merchandise to customer [TELEPHONE SOLICITOR (any industry) 299.357-014]. May compile statistics and prepare various reports for management. May be designated according to method of receiving orders as Mail-Order Clerk (clerical); Telephone-Order Clerk (clerical). GOE: 07.05.03 STRENGTH: S GED: R3 M3 L3 SVP: 4 DLU: 88 ONET CROSSWALK: 55323 Order Clerks- Materials, Merchandise, and Service http://www.occupationalinfo.org/24/249362026.html CODE: 249.362-026Buy the DOT:Download/CD-ROM TITLE(s): ORDER CLERK (clerical) alternate titles: customer-order clerk; order filler; order taker Processes orders for material or merchandise received by mail, telephone, or personally from customer or company employee, manually or using computer or calculating machine: Edits orders received for price and nomenclature. Informs customer of unit prices, shipping date, anticipated delays, and any additional information needed by customer, using mail or telephone. Writes or types order form, or enters data into computer, to determine total cost for customer. Records or files copy of orders received according to expected delivery date. May ascertain credit rating of customer [CREDIT CLERK (clerical) 205.367-022]. May check inventory control and notify stock control departments of orders that would deplete stock. May initiate purchase requisitions. May route orders to departments for filling and follow up on orders to ensure delivery by specified dates and be designated Telephone-Order Dispatcher (clerical). May compute price, discount, sales representative's commission, and shipping charges. May prepare invoices and shipping documents, such as bill of lading [bILLING TYPIST (clerical) 214.382-014]. May recommend type of packing or labeling needed on order. May receive and check customer complaints [CUSTOMER-COMPLAINT CLERK (clerical) 241.367-014]. May confer with production, sales, shipping, warehouse, or common carrier personnel to expedite or trace missing or delayed shipments. May attempt to sell additional merchandise to customer [TELEPHONE SOLICITOR (any industry) 299.357-014]. May compile statistics and prepare various reports for management. May be designated according to method of receiving orders as Mail-Order Clerk (clerical); Telephone-Order Clerk (clerical). GOE: 07.05.03 STRENGTH: S GED: R3 M3 L3 SVP: 4 DLU: 88 ONET CROSSWALK: 55323 Order Clerks- Materials, Merchandise, and Service

http://www.nchv.org/background.cfm "How many homeless veterans are there? Although accurate numbers are impossible to come by -- no one keeps national records on homeless veterans -- the VA estimates that 131,000 veterans are homeless on any given night. And approximately twice that many experience homelessness over the course of a year. Conservatively, one out of every three homeless men who is sleeping in a doorway, alley or box in our cities and rural communities has put on a uniform and served this country. According to the National Survey of Homeless Assistance Providers and Clients (U.S. Interagency Council on Homelessness and the Urban Institute, 1999), veterans account for 23 percent of all homeless people in America."

I will be praying for them too...

Thank you mobie 16!!!!!!! Five daughters????? :) Now THAT'S downright brave!!!

You're welcome giz. And I hope I didn't overwhelm you with too much information. I do get carried away sometimes. It sure sounds like you have a strong basis for an appeal. Though it is true that an ALJ is not actually "bound" by the VA decision - the fact that you are 100% disabled with VA should stand in your favor. It's not like you just strolled in there off the street and declared yourself disabled. I would think the ALJ would have to explain the reasons why he found you to NOT be disabled, when the VA has found you to be totally and permanently disabled...more substantial reasoning than just that he isn't bound by their decision. He also isn't "bound" by your doctor reports - but he has to give valid reasons why he determined that you can work when three doctors said you cannot. Another interesting fact to know is that most Judges don't actually write their own decisions. They make the decision, but Social Security has decision writers that actually write the decision, and then the Judge signs off on them. Judges are supposed to give the decision writers instructions, but Judges differ in the amount that they do that. There are some very interesting discussions on the ALJ Improvement Board about this issue: http://aljimprovement.proboards.com/index.cgi One complaint some of the decision writers express is when the Judge denies a claim, when the evidence doesn't support a denial, and it is up to the decision writer to try to write a decision that will make the Judge's decision "stick." So they have to go into the file and try to find evidence that will actually support the Judge's decision - even when they believe the Judge should have decided the other way. From what you share about your decision, the writer may not have done that. The writer may have intentionally wrote the decision in such a way that you are pretty much guaranteed a remand. I hope your discussion with your attorney goes well - and if not, I hope you can find another attorney you are more comfortable with. By the way, what type of work did the VE say you are able to do? Free

It takes a lot of strength to get to where you have gotten. So yes, I think you will get better. The lousy was already there. But walking through it is so much harder than walking around it. But each step takes you one step closer to the other side of it. There, the view is different. Free

Something else you might want to consider discussing with an attorney is filing a new claim. You are entitled to file a new claim while your Request for Review is pending. If the new claim is granted - the onset date would be the day after the ALJ Hearing (or whatever point they decide you meet the criteria, if later than the Hearing).So you would still have the 5 month waiting period for benefits. (This date can later be changed if the AC grants review on your initial claim). I am not sure how well your claim was developed on your initial application - but you most likely could have it better developed now. You have letters from doctors saying you can't work. Submit them. It would be hard for them to say the Judge has already considered them, if the ALJ decision says they didn't exist. Not sure what you best move is. But you can find more info on submitting a new claim while your appeal is pending at: http://www.ssa.gov/OP_Home/hallex/I-05/I-5-3-17.html And it would be best to discuss the matter with an attorney - because there are drawbacks and benefits either way. And it might be best to wait awhile - because you will have more evidence and new info then, and they can always go back up to 12 months (up to the date of the ALJ decision)if they grant it - so you won't actually lose any benefits by waiting, but you might not help your case by re-applying too soon. (Maybe you will have a new ulcer by that time from your journey through madness:) )

It is so good to hear positive reports, as well as negative ones. I guess a problem is - if you are the person who the agency dropped the ball on, then knowing they only drop the ball one time out of thousands of times is very little comfort. I do know some Veteran Service Reps give of themselves way above and beyond the call of duty. However, as you stated, there are also "rotten apples." But then again, someone who gives poor representation to one claimant might actually adequately represent another. I do know I have read cases where the BVA has stated that the claimant was represented - and lists the VSO. Most generally, this is in reference to why equitable tolling, or some other remedy does not apply - because the claimant WAS represented (and thus should have known whatever it is they are saying they did not know). However, it also seems that in any case, the VA expects you to be represented, and they expect you to be represented by a VSO.

Well.. yes... it does seem like we are...

Yes Virgina. There really is a Santa Claus.... :)

Glad to hear you are doing better....or at least feeling better. Sometimes at the initial levels, the workers do not really work against you (though sometimes they do). Sometimes it is more a matter of how well your disability fits neatly into the box of what their rules tell them constitutes "disabled" for your category of disability. If it fits neatly into the box - they can grant benefits. If not, they often have to deny benefits even if they know that you most likely will be approved if your case is developed. However, one of the reasons people with attorneys are sometimes granted benefits at an earlier level is that attorneys know how to properly develop the claim and so the needed information is in the file prior to the decision being made. But it can sometimes be hard to get an attorney at the earlier levels because if you are approved fairly quickly, they don't make very much money. Not that they are greedy (though some of them are), but they do have to make a living. Getting letters from your doctors sounds like a plan! I would warn that sometimes the reconsideration is like many of the VA's "denovo reviews" (i.e. they merely repeat whatever you were told the first time and add a couple sentences.) But some cases ARE granted at the reconsideration level - so you do have a chance! But if they just send you a copy and paste "same old same old" then by all means - get an attorney and start kicking STUFF! Have you checked out SSA's listing of impairments and checked to see how closely yours fits into their boxes? http://www.ssa.gov/disability/professionals/bluebook/

Welcome to the journey through the madness. And hang on tight - it's a hell of ride!

I am interested to know, did your lawyer provide the judge with a brief, before or during the hearing? If he did, you should have received a copy of it. The brief would highlight the evidence the attorney wants the Judge to look at, and argue why that shows you are disabled. Most Judges only spend a few hours on each case – so having an attorney highlight the important parts is very beneficial. This is not to excuse a Judge ignoring evidence. But many Judges might not dig deep for evidence, especially if you are represented by an attorney. Regardless of whether the lawyer pointed it out though, if the evidence was in the file, and the Judge indicated there was no such evidence – it sounds like grounds for an appeal. I did post info on the AC review. It is not a review where they ‘re-try,” so to speak, the case. They will be looking for those things in the previous posts – Did the Judge abuse his discretion? Did the Judge misapply the law? Were the Judge’s findings based on substantive evidence? (sounds like this might be where the appeal will focus..). Are you able to talk to your attorney about the decision? If so, what did they say?

Thank you Pete for your patience and willingness to help Veterans! :)

This isn’t actually something you brought up, but the first rule of order should be taking care of YOU. So before we get too involved in what to do next about Social Security – do you have the means to take care of yourself financially at the moment? Pay bills? Keep warm? Buy food? Stay safe? Get medical care? Etc. As I have mentioned – though you have every right to appeal the decision to the AC (Appeals Council) we are talking a year in the very least – most likely much longer. So you need a plan of how you are going to take care of yourself in the meantime.

Okay. It might be best if I bow out on this discussion.

Yep: DECISION ASSESSMENT DOCUMENT DOCKET NUMBER: 93-407 ACTIVITY: Rating, Authorization NAME: Fugo v. Brown ISSUE: Clear and unmistakable error (CUE) claims ACTION BY COURT: Affirmance Date: 11/16/93 BEFORE JUDGES: Holdaway, Kramer, Mankin "It must always be remembered that CUE is a very specific and rare kind of "error." It is the kind of error, of fact or of law, that when called to the attention of later reviewers compels the conclusion, to which reasonable minds could not differ, that the result would have been manifestly different but for the error. Thus even where the premise of error is accepted, if it is not absolutely clear that a different result would have ensued, the error complained of cannot be, ipso facto [by that fact itself] , clear and unmistakable."

I think I am talking about an entirely different kind of sacrifice. The one where they try to crucify you. I am not saying that a person shouldn't try to pursue a claim. I am merely saying that if a person begins that process, thinking that everyone is going to be on board for upholding truth and justice, they might just be surprised. Being fully aware of the risk involved (i.e. crucifixion) is an important part of the decision.

Your denial letter should indicate the evidence they used. It should discuss it in the narrative - and our letters also had several pages listing all the evidence they considered (with dates and evidence numbers). You should also be able to view your whole file. I am not sure if you can still do that at the Hearing Office or not. Our cases were paper files, which is unusual anymore. But they let me look at the whole folder and make copies of anything I wanted. (Here is the file. The copy machine is right there. Have at it.) But they also told me if our files were electronic, they could have just made me a copy of the whole thing on CD. I am not clear. Did he say you had an MRI on your brain and you did not? Or did he say you did not have one and you did? Either way, I guess it is an error. But since your case is already denied, the more errors in the decision, the better case you have for getting the decision put aside by the Appeals Council. (But again, that is a long and winding road).

Do you have a link to that case? That sure would help a lot on this thread.

Oh yes. I found that form. Is that all they have you sign? I thought there would also be a form between you and the VSO that would be more specific.

Ahhh... here is something SIMILAR (though not exact) to what I was talking about - in having to prove (and perhaps defend) the fact that you RELIED upon the advice given. It is in a discussion in SSAconnect on a specific occurrence with a non-attorney representative in Social Security. http://ssaconnect.com/component/option,com...ewtopic/t,2363/(at bottom of page)

Well... that's ONE of the keys. Having a winnable case is another.:)

Hey! Jump right on in! You are completely welcome here! :) Free