PUBLIC SUBMISSION | As of: March 16, 2009 Tracking No. 8079b5df Comments Due: November 07, 2008 |
Docket: SSA-2007-0068
Revisions to Rules on Representation of Parties
Comment On: SSA-2007-0068-0001
Revisions to Rules on Representation of Parties
Document: SSA-2007-0068-0047
Comment from Sauer, Diane, Diane M. Sauer Attorney at Law
CT,
Organization: Diane M. Sauer Attorney at Law Thank you for this opportunity to respond to your proposed rule. While
it is difficult for us to change our practices, we can get used to well executed
and well administered shifts toward increased use of electronics in Social Security
cases. It is the execution and details of the shift to more electronics that is of
concern.
Electronic Filing of the 1696:
With each change to increasingly electronic files, the potential of
human error and ways to reduce it or compensate for it need to be considered
and developed. I agree with another attorney who commented:
In implementing the Access Registration Policy, there must be some way to give
the attorney an online copy of his filing, and there must be some manner in which
the Agency is required to associate the filing with the file, so that the attorney gets
all future notices
Several years after major changes in Social Security’s software, 1696s
seem to be forgotten almost as many times as they are properly entered. Two
years after the requirement of filing 1695s came into existence, few field offices
consistently enter them correctly. At least the 1695 POMS provisions require
notices to representatives indicating that they have been processed. That way,
the frequent failure to send these notices alerts us to when there may be a
problem.
Please make changes to the system that reduce, not increase, the
chances of mistakes and oversights by overworked staff. It would help if we can
get confirmation of filing our 1969. It would be even more helpful if, additionally, by
filing electronically the 1696 becomes associated with the file, in a way that
assures we will get the notices sent out in our clients’ cases and get paid when
successful.
Requiring 1696 Forms for Withdrawals and Revocations of Representation:
If my client is unhappy with me and wants to fire me, they should not
have to know they need a 1696 form to do so. They should be able to send a
signed note to Social Security and to me, making their intentions clear.
If another attorney drops a case by writing a letter to the client, and
does not properly complete the 1696, I should not have to tell the client that I will
not take their case until that attorney correctly withdraws. That attorney may
never do so the correct way and then the client may be stuck without counsel.
Mandatory Direct Deposit of Fees:
Since I tried using your direct deposit system for awhile, I am well
aware of some of the shortcomings of doing so. When I had direct deposit, I only
knew that the U.S. Treasury had deposited a certain amount of money in my
account. My bank apparently did not know that it could provide more identifying
information to me or else its policy was not to do so. The result was the inability
to know for which of my cases I was getting paid and for which I wasn’t. Since my
clients come from all over the state, I was frequently on the phone with several
different field offices, trying to track down which case I had been paid on. Even
though banks can, reportedly, provide their customers with more identifying
information than just ‘U.S. Treas.’, many do not. I doubt that representatives, as
bank customers, are going to be able to convince the large banking institutions
they use to change their procedures.
If we are really going to mandatory direct deposit, we need some sort of
confirmation from Social Security when money has been deposited, how much it
is, and for whom. If a paper check is too labor intensive, what about having an
automatic electronic notice, sent out at the same time the deposit is made?
Additionally, “Notices of Award” and “Important Information” or some other form of
fee authorization need to be sent to the representative and claimant,
automatically, preferably before, but at a minimum at the same time the money is
deposited. Again, while this is supposed to happen, it often does not happen. Is
there a way to connect this to whatever processes get the money deposited?
Automatic Withdrawal of Overpayments of Fees:
Please don’t allow someone at Social Security to automatically withdraw money
from my bank account, with notice or otherwise. If I have been overpaid, I need to
pay it back and will do so. Don’t automate this process but give me due process
before I am deprived of property.
Conclusion:
As another commenter suggested, Social Security staff and
representatives spending time on the phone, trying to figure out what is going on,
is really counterproductive to an efficient system. The goal should be to get more
things done correctly, consistently, with less effort and with more clarity. Please
keep this goal out front in all changes made. Please provide sufficient notices,
electronic or paper, and simplify rather than complicate the processes.