www.iwantmydisability.com

SS Delays

It seems that every day we are reminded that the local Social Security offices and the State agencies are experiencing delays due to “backlogs.”

We represent a 62 year old Ultrasound Technician from Longwood, Florida.  We filed her application for Social Security Disability (“SSD”) benefits on January 8, 2024.  We contacted her local office in Florida repeatedly to discover why her case had not been transferred to the State agency.  We finally had to ask Public Affairs to get involved.

Ms. Love, from Public Affairs, told us that the average wait time in Florida for a claim to get assigned to an analyst at the State agency was 230 days.  With Ms. Love’s diligence and help, she was able to get our client’s case transferred to an analyst in October.  We submitted all of the supporting medical evidence we had been collecting, and the claimant was approved 2 months later.

It is a long and arduous process to apply for SSD benefits.  We are here to help.  Our office, located in Melville, Long Island, offers free phone consultations.  Please feel free to reach out if you are planning on applying for SSD benefits.

OTRs

Most times, a request for an on-the-record (“OTR”) decision is not considered until a couple of days before a hearing is scheduled to take place. Nonetheless, an OTR should still be pursued because it avoids the stress a claimant experiences when having to attend the hearing with an ALJ. Also, ALJs appreciate OTRs because they allow ALJs to devote more time to more complicated claims.

We represent a 57 year old security guard from Jamaica, who stopped working due to pain from various musculoskeletal impairments. The State agency medical consultants found the severity of the claimant’s pain to be credible. However, those consultants denied Social Security Disability (“SSD”) benefits twice because the claimant had no doctor providing functional limitations.

Since the claimant had to stop working because of pain, we referred the claimant to a pain management specialist, who supplied the requisite opinion. Based on that opinion, we submitted a brief explaining why the medical and vocational evidence in the file supported finding the claimant disabled under the Social Security rules and regulations. The ALJ agreed.

Retaining a disability attorney who has years of experience handling SSD claims is in your best interest. We have an encyclopedic of knowledge of the ins and outs of the SSA, from the initial application with the local office, to working with the State agency, the ALJ’s, and if necessary, the Appeals Council and Federal Court. If you want to greatly increase your chances of receiving a favorable outcome to your SSD claim, please contact our Melville, Long Island office for a free phone consultation.

LTD Surveillance

We represent claimants who are applying for Long Term Disability benefits.  We work with many different insurance companies, none of whom have your best interests at heart, even though they act like they are your best friend.

We always warn our clients to be aware of their surroundings because the insurance companies will most likely hire a surveillance company to spy on them, usually for three days in a row.  For example, if you see a strange vehicle on your block that stays in place for an extended period of time, then call the police.  If you notice a car following you, call the police.  If someone comes to your door when you are not expecting anyone, do not answer the door yourself.  The surveillance companies have many tricks to try and catch you doing something that they can manipulate into looking like you were doing something that proves you can work.  This is just a friendly reminder to be careful.

The Truth about Immigrants and Social Security 

by Susan Golden

It is no secret that getting approved for Social Security Disability (“SSD”) benefits is a battle.  To be entitled to SSD benefits, a person must have worked and paid into Social Security long enough to earn at least 40 work credits.  If you don’t have enough work credits, you might be eligible for Supplemental Security Income (“SSI”).  You must meet the same medical criteria, but you also have to meet the financial criteria.

Before filing a claim, we make certain that our clients have current treating doctors who support their inability to work fulltime due to their medical condition(s).  After their application is filed, it is processed by their local Social Security office and then sent to the State agency (“DDS”) for review.  But even when we submit supporting medical evidence to DDS, mostly due to the incompetence of their analysts, our client is denied.  More than half of the time, claimants are denied at the initial application, and at the first level of appeal, reconsideration.  As we’ve discussed so much over the years, the State agency analysts are civil service workers, not doctors or lawyers, and they deny claimants erroneously all of the time.  Claimants have a much better chance of getting approved at the hearing level simply because there are actual attorneys reviewing the claims and experienced Judges presiding at the hearing, if one is needed.  We’ve had quite a few of our claimant’s cases approved On The Record over the past few months, because we have decades of experience handling SSD claims.

We receive a lot of phone calls from people who have applied on their own and have been denied.  They’ve realized that this is not an easy process, they cannot do this on their own and they are ready to retain us to take over their claim for them.

It has come to our attention that vice presidential candidate J.D. Vance, has been making false claims stating that, “Social Security and Medicare are facing a “massive fraud problem” because of undocumented immigrants who are collecting benefits, citing what he said were incidents of fraud related to him by some of his constituents and friends.”   As we stated above, it is difficult to get approved for Social Security even when you meet the eligibility requirements.  You cannot collect benefits if you do not have a Social Security number.  If an immigrant has a Social Security number, and they have enough work credits and a disabling condition that prevents them from working full-time, they will be eligible to apply for benefits, and are entitled to them, just as any U.S. citizen with the same criteria is.

We want to make it perfectly clear that you will not be eligible for SSD benefits if you do not have a Social Security number and if you do not have enough work credits.  If someone tells you that immigrants are taking away your Social Security benefits, they  are dangerously misinformed and do not know what they are talking about.

“Let’s Get Loud” Series – Mental Health Records

by Susan Golden

Claimant 6 – Veteran Rating 100% Disabled and SSA Rules on Mental Health Records

The State Agency denied Mr. C’s case without considering more than half the evidence we submitted.  The denial letter only referred to Mr. C’s therapist, and the State Agency’s inability to obtain records from the therapist.  The truth is that we submitted a Medical Findings Summary from the therapist, along with a narrative report from her in lieu of sending her records, per Social Security’s own website.  We also had submitted a Medical Findings Summary from the claimant’s psychiatrist along with her records.  Furthermore, we submitted a letter from the VA rating Mr. C’s disability at 100%.  There was no mention of any of these documents in the denial letter at all.  The continuous denial of claims based on falsehoods at DDS has reached an intolerable point of intentional laziness, disrespect and uncaring.  

“Let’s Get Loud” Series – Treating Physician Rule

by  Susan Golden

Claimant 5 – Treating Physician Rule

Ms. S. applied for benefits in 2015.  Ms. S. suffers from severe mental health impairments, including bi-polar disorder, anxiety and depression.  Ms. S’s father has been our contact throughout the last nine years as his daughter is too impaired by her mental health conditions to communicate with us.  With Ms. S’s father’s help, we were able to submit a wealth of supportive medical evidence.  Over the course of the last nine years, Ms. S. has seen four different doctors at the clinic where she receives treatment.  All four doctors concur that due to Ms. S’s restrictions and limitations, that she would be unable to work a fulltime job, and in fact, meets multiple listings.  Since Ms. S. applied before the Treating Physician Rule was terminated, her claim should have been approved at her first hearing in 2017.  However, this was one of those cases where the ALJ decided to play doctor, and ignore all of the medical evidence and denied the case two times, based solely on the ALJ’s interpretation of psychiatric treatment notes.  As in all our other cases that are appealed to the AC and then Federal court, it took seven years for a third hearing with a new ALJ, which is scheduled for September 19, 2024.  Ms. S is married with a young son.  Her mother and father were her main caregivers; her mother sleeping at Ms. S’s home multiple days a week to help her care for her son and with daily household chores.  Ms. S’s father assisted us diligently, going above and beyond for his daughter to get her the benefits she deserves.  Tragically, Ms. S’s mother passed away a few months ago, leaving Ms. S in a worse state than she was previously.  For nine years this case has been dragging on, when it should have been approved based on the treating physician rule.   Ms. S’s case was just approved On The Record by ALJ Robert Schriver, based on the same evidence that has been in our claimant’s file since her last hearing.

OTR Efficiency

An on-the-record (“OTR”) decision saves a claimant time by receiving an approval before a hearing with an Administrative Law Judge (“ALJ”) takes place.  An OTR can also save a claimant money.  Since attorney fees grow each month before a claim is approved, by receiving an OTR well in advance of the hearing, there are fewer fees to pay. Unfortunately, most ALJs will not look at a brief requesting an OTR until a couple of days before the scheduled hearing.

An OTR also avoids the stress a claimant experiences when having to attend a hearing with an ALJ.  Hearings can last for a couple of hours if there are experts, and hearings usually do not start on time.  If the case is strong, ALJs like OTRs because they free up time and resources for more complicated claims.

We represent a 55 year old claimant from Franklin Square with physical and mental impairments, who worked as a teacher’s aide and an administrative clerk.  Those occupations are considered light, i.e., more strenuous than sedentary work.  I submitted a brief showing how Vocational Experts had testified that both occupations provide no skills that transfer to sedentary work.

FI showed that five treating doctors explained why the claimant could not even perform sedentary work.  The State agency medical consultant, whose credentials could not be determined because the State refused to disclose the full name, was the only doctor who believed the claimant could work.  The State consultant never saw the claimant, and failed to review most of the medical records.

Given the above facts, I maintained that the claimant should be found disabled under the Grid rules, even if she were capable of full time sedentary work.  Consequently, I asked the ALJ to issue an OTR.  The ALJ agreed that an OTR would be appropriate, which eliminated the need for the claimant to attend the hearing.

This is a perfect example of why retaining an experienced, knowledgable disability attorney is in your best interest if you intent on applying for SSD benefits.  Please call my Long Island office for a free phone consultation.

“Let’s Get Loud” Series – DDS’s Laziness

by Susan Golden

Claimant 4 – Consultative Exams ordered by the State agency

Ms. G  applied for SSD benefits on June 26, 2024.  Ms. G was an elementary school teacher for 33 years.  She suffers from severe migraines, vertigo, severe back problems and anorexia, to name a few of her impairments.  On August 5, 2024, we submitted supporting medical reports from Ms. G’s treating doctors, which included an EMG and a pharmacy printout.

On August 22, 2024, my assistant, Samantha Diamond, received a phone call from Mr. Begelman, the analyst at the State agency assigned to Ms. G’s case.  He was calling to advise us that he was scheduling Ms. G. for a Consultative Exam (“CE”) with the IMA, the company that SS contracts with to perform CE’s.  According to the regulations, CE’s are supposed to be scheduled only after making best efforts to obtain the necessary information from the treating sources, which are the preferred source.  When Ms. Diamond asked Mr. Begelmann= if he had reviewed Ms. G’s file and seen what we submitted, he admitted that he hadn’t even looked at the file yet.  So without even knowing what was or was not needed, and without doing the bare minimum required by the regulations, Mr. Begelman scheduled Ms. G for a CE with IMA.

Notably, most of the time the “specialists” at IMA are from the wrong medical board, if they are certified at all, let alone trained in the specialty that is relevant to the claimant’s impairments.  Additionally, IMA doctors claim they do not have any records or information from the State agency about claimants, which begs the question, how do they know what exam to perform?  IMA also has signs all over their offices which state that Social Security claimants are not allowed to record their exams, yet in small print on the same sign it states that Workers’ Comp claimants are allowed.  That disparate treatment is ridiculous, and if our claimant tries to record an exam, the IMA employees cry that their HIPAA rights are being violated.  HIPAA only applies to a person’s medical information – it provides no rights, and has no relevance, to IMA staff.  Since IMA admits to allowing Workers Comp claimants to record exams in the very same offices where the SS claimants are being examined, by the very same staff, and the very same doctors, then IMA must be confessing to countless HIPPA violations.

“Let’s Get Loud” Series – ALJ’s

by Susan Golden

Claimant 3:  Administrative Law Judges

Mr. V applied for benefits in 2017.  He retained our service after he had applied on his own.  Mr. V. worked as a jeweler his entire professional life, well over 30 years.  He had 2 children, and was separated from his wife, but they remained friendly.  His only concern was being able to take care of his children.  He suffered from severe lower back pain and needed surgery.

On January 10, 2018, I submitted proof of dire need to the State agency.  Mr. V’s case was initially denied and a hearing was scheduled for April 12, 2019.  On January 30, 2019, three months before the scheduled hearing, I received a phone call from Mr. V’s mother that he had passed away.  She actually found him dead on the floor of their apartment.

ALJ John Carlton, at the Bronx hearing office, denied Mr. V’s claim on September 26, 2019.  It took the ALJ FIVE months to issue a decision.  We appealed the case to the Appeals Council (“AC”).  Prior to 2016, the AC remanded and even approved quite a lot of cases.  After 2016, approvals disappeared, remands are rare, and most cases are denied.  Mr. V’s claim was denied by the AC on December 9, 2019.

We appealed the case to Federal Court.  The Honorable Judge Ronnie Abrams ordered a remand for a new hearing on July 6, 2021.  The case was supposed to go back to ALJ Carlton for another hearing, but first it had to be sent back to the AC for processing from Judge Abrams.  The AC did not send it back to ALJ Carlton until January 2022.

On January 9, 2022, we received a letter from the Bronx hearing office, on behalf of the ALJ, requesting updated medical information, despite knowing that the claimant had been deceased at this point for three years.  On March 9, 2022, two months later, we received another letter from Hearing Office Director Michael E. Higgins, requesting a “current Authorization to Release Information” form.  Again, the claimant was deceased.  What is going on at this office?  The hearing was scheduled for June 8, 2022, six months after the Bronx OHO received the case, almost a year after the case was remanded by Judge Abrams, three years after the claimant passed away, and five years after he had originally applied for SSD benefits.

On September 27, 2022, almost four months after the last hearing, we sent a letter to Chief Judge Selwyn S. Walters at the Bronx OHO because ALJ Carlton had still not issued a decision.  We did not receive a response.  On December 21, 2022, SIX months after the last hearing, ALJ Carlton denied the claim again, seventeen months after Judge Abrams remand order.

After filing another appeal in Federal Court, on December 13, 2023, United States Magistrate Judge Stewart D. Aaron remanded Mr. V’s case for a new hearing.  The case was assigned to a different judge, ALJ Joani Sedaca at the New York City OHO, because ALJ Carlton had already heard the case twice.  Notably, our initial request for a hearing was May 9, 2018.  Mr. V’s third hearing has been scheduled for December 2, 2024, six and half years after the initial request, and six years since Mr. V passed away.

MS Approval

We frequently represent claimant diagnosed with multiple sclerosis (“MS”), an undeniably progressive and incurable disease.   When seeking Social Security Disability (“SSD”) benefits, our MS applications have always been approved after hearings with an administrative law judge (“ALJ”).  In other words, ALJs recognize readily these claims as meritorious.

We represent a 55 year old bookkeeper from Bayside with MS, whose SSD application was approved by ALJ Schriver without a hearing.  We were pleased that it was obviously to ALJ Schriver that our client was disabled.  The question that arises is why isn’t it ever obvious to the State agency that MS claimants are disabled, and do not need hearings to prove it.

“Let’s Get Loud” Series – State Agency Ineptness

by Susan Golden

Claimant 2:  State Agency Ineptness

Ms. A applied for SSD benefits on December 19, 2023.  She suffers from Post-Covid Syndrome.  We also represented her for Long Term Disability benefits, which was approved in two months, based on the same medical evidence that we submitted to Social Security.  By the beginning of March 2024, we had submitted to the NY State agency (“DDS”), Ms. A’s medical records and reports from eight doctors, all of whom supported Ms. A’s inability to work fulltime.  We filed even more medical support to the Agency than we typically do, because we included an Independent Medical Exam and Functional Capacity Evaluation, both of which supported her disability.

On March 5, 2024, I called Ms. Mohammad, the analyst at DDS who was assigned to Ms. A’s claim.  I advised her that we had submitted an overabundance of supportive medical evidence in a timely manner.  I purposely did this because DDS considers any medical records more than three months old to be “stale,” and they habitually sit on cases for longer than that in order to claim they don’t have recent records.

I called Ms. Mohammad again on April 3, 2024, since I had not heard back from her, and there still was no decision on Ms. A’s claim.   On May 20, 2024, I left a message for Ms. Muhammads’s supervisor, Ms. Flowers-Williams, as I had still not heard back from Ms. Muhammad.  Ms. Flowers-Williams did not return my call, but Ms. Muhammad finally did.  I told her that I could see Ms. A’s efile via the ERE system, and no work had been done on Ms. A’s case since the end of February.  Ms. Muhammad told me she would “get to it.”  Two days later, on May 22, 2024, after not looking at the file since the end of February, Ms. Muhammad told me she sent the case to the State agency in-house “doctors” for review.  As expected, Ms. A’s case was denied on May 29, 2024, six days after the “doctors” received the claim.  In other words, they reviewed 800 pages of medical records in six days.  The denial letter lists the medical sources upon which the State agency based their decision.  They ignored most of the medical evidence we submitted; not even mentioning half of the evidence we had submitted.  Unfortunately, this scenario happens all of the time, and our only recourse is to appeal.

We received a phone call from DDS last week, asking us to submit “updated” records from Ms. A’s doctors.  When we asked the analyst how long she’s had the case, she said since June.  So it took her almost 4 months to contact us for updated records, and completely ignored our comments on Ms. A’s appeal which stated that the original records we submitted months ago were submitted in a timely manner, and they should make a decision based on those records.  We will not play their games.  DDS needs to own up to their own delays and ineptness, and make a decision based on the supporting documents.  But they will continue to drag this out, and make Ms. A must wait what will be several more months, if not years, before she gets approved.

What is the number one question that I am asked by claimants?  “How am I supposed to survive with no income while waiting for a decision?”  I have no answer for that because there is no answer!  And no one in the SSA seems to care.

SSA Slammed

By Susan Golden

As a follow up to my last blog, I am happy to report that while not in response to my letter to the Commissioner of Social Security, John Oliver took on the Social Security Administration on his Last Week Tonight with John Oliver episode on September 15, 2024.  I am glad someone is trying to help.  Thank you @LastWeekTonight.

“Let’s Get Loud ” Series – Payment Center Delays

by Susan Golden

About a week ago, after receiving yet another egregious denial on one of our client’s cases, I decided that I needed to do something more to help our clients.  After much thought, I wrote a letter to Martin O’Malley, the Commissioner of Social Security and sent copies of the letter to Senators Gillibrand and Schumer.  I also sent a copy of the letter to the media.  I chose to give a synopsis of some of our clients’ cases, each case representing a different, serious problem  within the Social Security Administration.  I wanted to make some “noise”.  While our hands are tied, and we have to follow the SSA’s procedures regarding appealing claims, I want to get these stories out there, and hope that someone in the government or media will hear my plea and really try to make changes within the SSA that benefits our hard working, deserving citizens.

I want to share these cases with you, while respecting the privacy of our clients.  Today I will begin with the first case in the series, Let’s Get Loud.  Our client was approved for SSD benefits, 11 years after applying.  Her case highlights the problems at the payment centers, where an approved claimant’s retroactive benefits are calculated and then released to the claimant.

Claimant Number 1:  Delayed Retroactive Benefits

Ms. Y was forced to stop working on December 12, 2012, due to a Protein S deficiency that causes her blood to clot, resulting in deep vein thromboses and pulmonary emboli.  Her post thrombotic syndrome produces painful leg edema, which requires her to elevate her legs as much as possible.  Ms. Y applied for benefits on October 23, 2013.  Her date last insured was December 3, 3017.  She had her first hearing on October 16, 2015.  On March 23, 2023, after Ms. Y’s case was twice reversed by federal district court and reassigned to ALJ Patrick Kilgannon, he issued a partially favorable approval of benefits as of September 12, 2017.  We appealed to Federal Court again, and received a remand solely for a calculation of benefits on December 18, 2023, for the time period from February 15, 2013 to September 12, 2017.

On May 15, 2023, I sent information to Ms. Y’s field office in Freeport, New York, advising them that Ms. Y was in a dire need situation.  She had no medical insurance, and no money, and without medical treatment, she could die.  I asked that her retroactive benefits be expedited.  It has been eleven years since Ms. Y applied for benefits, seventeen months since her first approval, and Ms. Yearby has not received a dime of her retroactive benefits.  I have been emailing the Special Appeals Federal Court Remand processing center since May 2023.  The processing centers are responsible for calculating claimants’ retroactive benefits who have had their claims approved in Federal Court or after a Federal Court remand.  Most of my emails go unanswered.  On the rare occasion I get a response after begging for one, it is the same robotic response each time, “currently our processing times are longer than normal.”

Ms. Yearby had no choice but to return to work at a substantial risk of stroke or death during 2021-2022 because she needed medical insurance.  Her doctor repeatedly confirmed that she risked her life by working.  It does NOT take seventeen months to figure out what a claimant is owed.  In fact, a year after they had the claim, the processing center asked us for Ms. Y’s pay stubs for the time period that she worked.  It took them a year to ask for that information, and then several months later they asked Ms. Y to submit Form SSA-821, Work Activity Report.  As you can see, the mishandling of this claim is horrific.  I even went to the media and contacted Kristen Thorne of ABC news.  Her attempts to contact the processing center have been futile because they did not even respond to her.

Another Seven Year Saga

 A 35 year old claimant from Brooklyn with mental impairments retained us in March 2017, to apply for Social Security Disability (“SSD”) benefits.  We successfully went to federal court twice to get the administrative law judge (“ALJ”) reversed.  The second reversal ordered that the case be reassigned to a new ALJ.

On remand, the new ALJ accepted the opinions of the treating psychiatrists, and found the claimant was entitled to SSD benefits since 2016.  It took five administrative hearings, two protracted federal court appeals, and over seven years, but the claimant finally obtained the outcome she desired.

This case was not a difficult case to approve as evidenced by the final decision.  The decision was based on the same medical evidence that had been submitted five years ago.  If the SSA wasn’t fraught with analysts and adjudicators who are lazy and incompetent, and if so many of the SSA’s rules and regulations weren’t so outdated and nonsensical, then this case would have been approved seven years ago.

We don’t give up on our clients if they have a medical problem with doctors who support their case and are willing to help.  We truly care about our clients, and in many cases, such as this one, form a special bond with them.  If you want an experienced disability attorney who is going to fight for you, please call our Melville, Long Island office for a free phone consultation.

Non-Medical Evidence

We represent a 61 year old from Mount Vernon with physical impairments.  The administrative law judge (“ALJ”) held a hearing today, which made it clear that Social Security Disability (“SSD”) benefits would be approved. The approval was expected given the impact of a new regulation.

The claimant’s past relevant work (“PRW”) had consisted of three occupations during the previous 15 years: Customer Care Representative (“CCR”), which was sedentary work, Medical Clerk and Ward Clerk, which were light occupations.  However, under the revised regulation, PRW is now limited to the past five years, which made CCR no longer relevant.  The State agency found Ms. Thomas not disabled because she could perform her past sedentary work as a CCR.

Under the Grid rules, the claimant had to be found disabled if she had no acquired skills from her PRW as a Medical Clerk or Ward Clerk that could transfer to sedentary occupations.  Before the hearing, I supplied the ALJ with various federal court decisions where vocational experts (“VEs”) testified the Medical Clerk and Ward Clerk occupations did not provide any transferable skills.  Thus, even accepting the State agency doctor’s opinion that the claimant could do sedentary work, a finding of disabled was required.

The hearing was relatively short.  ALJ posed a hypothetical to the VE, who concluded the claimant was unable to perform her PRW.  And because the ALJ accepted the treating opinions that the claimant could not even perform sedentary work, transferability was not even an issue.  Consequently, the claimant had to be found disabled.

Every claimant’s case is different.  There are many factors that Social Security takes into consideration when deciding whether or not a person is unable to work a fulltime job, which is Social Security’s definition of being disabled.  The person’s age, past work history, and medical problems are just to name a few.  So while it may seem obvious to someone that they are disabled and cannot work,  it is not so clear cut to Social Security.  In this case, it was non-medical evidence based on the claimant’s PRW and Grid rules that we focused on, which is the evidence the ALJ based his approval upon.  Our client put her trust in us, and together, we obtained the information necessary to get her SSD benefits approved.  Please call our office, if you are thinking of applying for SSD, for a free phone consultation.  Our office is conveniently located on the border of Nassau and Suffolk counties on Long Island.

LTD Approvals

We just received approvals from MetLife, New York Life, and Lincoln Life on three long term disability (“LTD”) applications.  While the approvals involved different insurers and impairments, the applications were similar in their preparation.  Our approach has been called gilding the lily, but our results speak for themselves.

LTD applications almost invariably consist of three parts:  forms for the claimant, the employer, and the treating doctor.  If only those three forms are returned, then the insurer is almost guaranteed to insist on receiving more information before approving.  When we submit an LTD application it is usually is accompanied by objective diagnostic testing and clinical records, witness statements, medical treatise data, functional assessments, and vocational reports.

Most employers establish LTD plans by buying an insurance policy.  Because that insurance company is liable for paying any claims, that is a conflict of interest  results in denials of valid claims.  To be profitable, the insurer must have a liability acceptance rate (“LAR”) where it takes in more premiums than it pays out in claims.  When the LAR is too high, insurers deny more claims, regardless of the merits.

By providing more evidence compared to other applicants, insurers take the path of least resistance, and target other claimants for denial or termination.   Don’t let the insurance company fool you by pretending to care, and to be your friend.   All they care about is making money.

Please feel free to call our office for a free phone consultation.  We have helped thousands of individuals obtain long term disability benefits under individual and group policies from many insurance companies, including Unum, Prudential, Reliance, The Standard, Guardian, and Metropolitan Life, to name a few.

RCPD

Retrograde cricopharyngeal dysfunction (“RCPD”) is  lifelong condition, where a dysfunctional cricopharyngeus muscle causes an inability to burp, causing in excess gas and discomfort in the chest or throat.  The symptoms include stomach, chest or throat pain, loud gurgling noises, bloating, nausea, and excessive gas.

RCPD is an objectively demonstrable physical impairment.  However, according to the Yale School of Medicine, RCPD symptoms can make social interactions embarrassing, resulting in people experiencing social anxiety.

We represent a 54 year old credit card clerk with RCPD from Massapequa, whose Social Security Disability (“SSD”) benefit application was approved today by an Administrative Law Judge (“ALJ”).  Because the claimant’s mental health providers would not provide their records, or a summary report, we arranged for a psychologist who frequently works for Social Security to evaluate the claimant.  While the ALJ believed the RCPD probably precluded sedentary work, the ALJ determined that the claimant was even more impaired mentally.

Simply submitting medical records is not enough to get an approval for SSD benefits, which is why it is highly recommended to retain an experienced disability attorney to represent you.  Please call our Melville, Long Island office for a free phone consultation.

Disabled Adult Child

Multiple Sclerosis

Multiple Sclerosis (“MS”) is a disabling disease because of its symptoms.  Merely having objective evidence for the diagnosis is insufficient to secure disability benefits.

We represent a 32 year old with MS from Bethpage who worked as a teacher.  The MS diagnosis was never challenged, but the State agency denied Social Security Disability (“SSD”) benefits.  We obtained reports from the claimant’s neurologist, internist, pain management specialist, and chiropractor explaining why the claimant’s symptoms interfered with her ability to work consistently.  Based on those reports, the administrative law judge (“ALJ”) agreed that the claimant would be off task at least 21% of the time.  Then, based on the testimony of the vocational expert, the ALJ determined the claimant was disabled.

You cannot assume that you will get approved for disability based on a medical diagnosis.  It’s important to know what information, beyond a diagnosis and medical records, would be needed to have your claim approved.  This is why we always recommend hiring an experienced disability attorney to represent you for your SSD claim.  Our office, located on Long Island, offers a free phone consultation.  Please call us if you want to apply for disability and we will discuss your options with you.

Headaches

Disability adjudicators are skeptical about approving claims for headaches because the pain cannot be seen, and there is no diagnostic test for them.  However, if a cause for the headaches can be objectively established, then the benefits should be approved.

We represent a 55 year old administrative clerk from Wantagh with pseudotumor cerebri.  Pseudotumor cerebri is a somewhat rare condition that causes increased pressure inside the skull.  As the pressure increases, so do a person’s headaches.  In preparation for a hearing with an administrative law judge (“ALJ”), we submitted medical treatise information identifying the symptoms of pseudotumor cerebri, and detailed reports from the treating neurologist, which explained the genesis and severity of the resulting headaches.

The ALJ issued a fully favorable decision, awarding the claimant Social Security Disability (“SSD”) benefits.   Our client is overjoyed, and thankful that she retained us.  We highly recommend retaining an experienced disability attorney if you are applying for SSD benefits.  Call our office for a free phone consultations.  We are conveniently located on Long Island in Melville.