It is no secret that Social Security
is backlogged in trying to hold hearings. And we all know it is taking
up to 24 months for a claimant to get a hearing scheduled. The obvious
answer would be for Social Security to hire more administrative law
judges; however, Congress simply will not appropriate enough money for
that. So, how does the Social Security Administration react? By
offering claimants the option to have a hearing by video-teleconference
(VTC).
At a VTC, the claimant and representative appear in a hearing center near the claimant's home. However, the judge may be in another city, even another state. Witnesses called by Social Security, such as the vocational expert, may be anywhere: in the room with the claimant, in the room with the distant judge, or even at home and testifying via telephone.
Why would a claimant sign up for a cockeyed arrangement like a hearing by Video-Teleconference? The main selling point is that it reduces the waiting time and allows a hearing to be scheduled sooner. I'm not sure this is true in all cases; it might be true in some cases. But there are downsides to the VTC arrangement for the claimant. I will admit that I have been involved in some video-teleconference hearings that went smoothly and without objection. On the other hand, I have been involved in some VTCs that were a nightmare. You don't know which experience you will have until you get there--and then it is too late.
Here are my main objections to the use of video-teleconference hearings:
One, it's just more impersonal and removed. You aren't able to look people in the eye when you speak to them. And it opens up the possibility of communications problems: you can't hear the vocational witness because of a poor telephone connection, or similar problems.
Two, and this is my worse fear, you lose the option to appear before a local judge who is known and have a hearing before a judge at the national hearing center in Chicago or some other distant location. Chances are, I have never met this judge and know next to nothing about him or her. And the judge's award rates are often much lower than the judges in the local hearing office. Again, you don't know whether your case is going to the national hearing center or not until it's too late. Opting out of the VTC hearing at least guarantees that you will get a local judge.
Under current rules, every claimant has a right to opt out of video-teleconference hearings and to appear in person before a judge. There are conditions:
1. You or your representative must opt out of the VTC in writing.
2. You may only opt out after the request for hearing has been filed and ODAR has sent you the written notice of your right to opt out (which will include a form to opt out of the VTC).
3. You must opt out within 30 days of receiving the above notice (and obviously before the hearing has been scheduled).
Will opting out of a VTC cause a delay in getting your hearing scheduled? It may. I honestly don't believe there is any way to know that for sure on a case by case basis. While I am aware that my clients are often suffering financially and need closure as soon as possible, I am also aware that I need to give my client the best chance I can of getting an award rather than a denial. Claimants should know that they have the right to get an in-person hearing, if they follow the rules set forth by Social Security.
At a VTC, the claimant and representative appear in a hearing center near the claimant's home. However, the judge may be in another city, even another state. Witnesses called by Social Security, such as the vocational expert, may be anywhere: in the room with the claimant, in the room with the distant judge, or even at home and testifying via telephone.
Why would a claimant sign up for a cockeyed arrangement like a hearing by Video-Teleconference? The main selling point is that it reduces the waiting time and allows a hearing to be scheduled sooner. I'm not sure this is true in all cases; it might be true in some cases. But there are downsides to the VTC arrangement for the claimant. I will admit that I have been involved in some video-teleconference hearings that went smoothly and without objection. On the other hand, I have been involved in some VTCs that were a nightmare. You don't know which experience you will have until you get there--and then it is too late.
Here are my main objections to the use of video-teleconference hearings:
One, it's just more impersonal and removed. You aren't able to look people in the eye when you speak to them. And it opens up the possibility of communications problems: you can't hear the vocational witness because of a poor telephone connection, or similar problems.
Two, and this is my worse fear, you lose the option to appear before a local judge who is known and have a hearing before a judge at the national hearing center in Chicago or some other distant location. Chances are, I have never met this judge and know next to nothing about him or her. And the judge's award rates are often much lower than the judges in the local hearing office. Again, you don't know whether your case is going to the national hearing center or not until it's too late. Opting out of the VTC hearing at least guarantees that you will get a local judge.
Under current rules, every claimant has a right to opt out of video-teleconference hearings and to appear in person before a judge. There are conditions:
1. You or your representative must opt out of the VTC in writing.
2. You may only opt out after the request for hearing has been filed and ODAR has sent you the written notice of your right to opt out (which will include a form to opt out of the VTC).
3. You must opt out within 30 days of receiving the above notice (and obviously before the hearing has been scheduled).
Will opting out of a VTC cause a delay in getting your hearing scheduled? It may. I honestly don't believe there is any way to know that for sure on a case by case basis. While I am aware that my clients are often suffering financially and need closure as soon as possible, I am also aware that I need to give my client the best chance I can of getting an award rather than a denial. Claimants should know that they have the right to get an in-person hearing, if they follow the rules set forth by Social Security.
Comments
Post a Comment