Posts in:March, 2016

The Partially Favorable Decision

Posted March 31, 2016 by Premier Disability Services, LLC® Every claimant who files for Social Security Disability benefits must allege a date when their medical impairments became disabling. This date is known as the “Alleged Onset Date” or AOD. When the Social Security Administration (SSA) finds a claimant disabled as of their AOD, this is known as a fully favorable decision. At times, SSA may determine that a claimant is disabled on a date subsequent to their AOD. This is known as an “Established Onset Date” or EOD. When this occurs, the decision is known as a partially favorable decision. Below are a few reasons SSA may award a partially favorable decision instead of a fully favorable decision.

Reconsideration Denied: Should I Just Give Up?

Posted March 26, 2016 by Premier Disability Services, LLC® The answer is a resounding no. If a claimant’s initial application for Social Security Disability benefits is denied, the next step is to request reconsideration . Data shows that the vast majority of reconsideration appeals will be denied. Unfortunately, this is a necessary step for most claimants. It is important not to get discouraged and abandon your claim completely.

SSA Releases AR 15-1(4): Changing the Standard for Meeting Listing 1.04A

Posted March 18, 2016 by Premier Disability Services, LLC® Our office has begun receiving correspondence from the Social Security Administration (SSA) regarding a Fourth Circuit Court of Appeals Case called Radford v. Colvin that may impact the determination made on a claimant’s prior claim. The issue involved in this case was whether the clinical signs and symptoms detailed in listing 1.04A for disorders of the spine had to be present simultaneously or merely needed to be present at some point during the disability period. The Appeals Court held that the listing requires a more, “free-form, contextual inquiry that makes 12 months the relevant metric for assessment of the claimant’s duration of disability.” Ultimately, the court determined that a claimant does not need to show that all clinical signs or symptoms are present at the same time, or even in a particular proximity.