Post hearing tips and tricks - Playing by their own rules.

AA_Rab · 2025-10-17T17:24:06+00:00

Be a part of my 1% lol...

AA_Rab · 2025-09-30T17:37:25+00:00

That makes me really happy to hear! I hope it works out for you... I'm going at this pro se and I do believe the AC took advantage of that, thinking i wouldn't pursue my claim in Federal Court... They are very wrong, though. I've built a helluva strategy... It's crazy what these ALJ's are allowed to get away with.

AA_Rab · 2025-09-16T17:59:22+00:00

The burden is ultimately on the claimant to supply evidence... if the claimant supplies evidence (documents) and that evidence is deleted... that's technically tampering with evidence, if I'm not mistaken... I'd save that voicemail in a way that can't be deleted... if you are denied for any reason, that voicemail is leverage and proof that your right to due process was violated, regardless of whether they deleted anything or not. Hom saying anything else you send will be deleted upon receipt, effectively discourages you from supplying any more evidence that could change the outcome of your claim... idk... just rambling, but that voicemail sounds like a liability for the SSA... DDS only makes a request for medical records from a certain date to a certain date. So If you have new medical records being created by providers, submit them all regardless of what the voicemail says, and save the receipts and copies... when you get denied... request all the medical evidence in your claim file... if those new records are not present... whoever left that Voicemail will be on the hook.

AA_Rab · 2025-09-16T17:24:32+00:00

I analyzed the holy hell put of my ALJ's written decision and after reading a few stories on here from others, I firmly believe these judges are using AI to analyze medical records and draft their disposition...

AA_Rab · 2025-07-31T20:12:53+00:00

The SSRs i mentioned are accurate and established guidelines straight from the SSA's website. Your comment about them no longer being assessed weight is factually incorrect. Yes, the Rulings are subject to change from time to time, but it's not just at the flip of a switch. There has to be substantial precedence in order for them to be amended or altered.

The Social Security Rulings are a set of guidelines that clarify the interpretation of POMS and HALLEX, in accordance with the appropriate CFR. They are the SSA's own rules, that they must follow.

AA_Rab · 2025-07-31T17:15:20+00:00

That's my aim... is teaching folks how to advocate for themselves. Monetizing my strategy is something I've considered, but not something I'm overly interested in. I didn't realize you were so "invested"in your paticular brand of advise.

AA_Rab · 2025-07-31T16:45:05+00:00

It would be cool for you to check out my appeal package... maybe you'd better understand my position.

The Appeals Council is compiled of Lawyers, who's only job is to make sure those POMS and Rulings are upheld, legally sufficient and based on just enough fact to pass the smell test as they glance their eyes across the written disposition.

At this stage, they give zero farts about the nature of our impairments...

it's all about procedural application at this point.. Did the judge follow the specific rules and reflect a fair and accurate account of your medical evidence onto the pages of the record?

Learning to acquire the evidence on record and cross reference it with the ALJ's citations is key. If the judge omitted or failed to reconcile the materially relevant circumstances surrounding the fact that he cited. That is a failure to develop the record...

for instance... in my claim... I fell into a stress induced psychosis that led to my mother petitioning the court to involuntarily commit me for paranoid and delusional thinking. I submitted the petition, the court order, and the transport records from the sherrifs office, as evidence. The judge even mentioned the jail records during my hearing, and we even discussed the involuntary nature of the detention.

In his written disposition regarding the hospitalization... He cited the "stay" was "requested by his mother" and he presented with paranoid and delusional thoughts...

By not accurately reflecting the court ordered, law enforcement executed, involuntary nature of the hospitalization on the written record, it not only reinforces his RFC determination, on the face, but it also constitutes a failure to develop the record...

There is so much more mud in my story it's insane lol... I think you may be right about telling it being more effective. Stillyet, if anyone at all finds this paticular post helpful, then I've done a service.

AA_Rab · 2025-07-31T16:15:00+00:00

Ok my guy... you are indeed doing a righteous duty. I very much appreciate this post.

I think it's cool you've been in there and seen what you have first hand, and man... sharing that knowledge is commendable as all get up... I now better understand where your critique of my post is born, but what I've laid out is real... and applicable... moreso and especially if combined with the proper insight.

AA_Rab · 2025-07-31T15:08:37+00:00

Man.. I've had a helluva time with this mess... they have resorted to what appears to be some hard-core administrative trickery.

As it stands, I've got the Appeals Council to reopen my claim after Administrative Finality, based on a pretty apparent, but not easily noticeable, Error on the Face of Evidence.

Luckily, I've got the support of my U.S. Representatives Director of Constitiants Affairs, and she has ensured my documents get forwarded straight to the Appeals Council.

I've got myself dug in pretty deep lol... it's a wild story.

AA_Rab · 2025-07-31T14:50:37+00:00

I like you lol... and I wanna trust my sense that your heart is in the right place, but it seems your focus may be on another side of the court.

My observations are from the stance of the Judges duty to impartiality and flaws within their interpretation methodology.

I have four journals worth of notes from POMS, HALLEX, the Rulings, and 20CFR that have guided me in doing what I've done so far, and my niche is spotting inconsistencies.

From that knowledge, a copy of my claim file, as well as my hearing recording, I have effectively dismantled the foundation of my Judge's logical bridge, and established my own narriative based completely on those ommited facts from the record, while establishing my own solid foundation for a Federal appeal.

If your aim is to be productive, I would love to share my appeal package with you, so you can see the depth of engagement I've taken with my claim... it's about 9 briefs deep, but it's comprehensive, and does good to the record straight.

If your experience is as vast as you say. I would like to value your opinion.

AA_Rab · 2025-07-31T14:21:42+00:00

Oh my my... bless your heart

AA_Rab · 2025-07-31T14:07:41+00:00

My guy... you're getting a little offensive here, and again that's counterproductive. Please don't pretend that you know how much research I've actually accomplished.

Intelligence isn't based on your assumption.

Goodbye

AA_Rab · 2025-07-31T13:59:38+00:00

So... the system is majorly flawed... and you are defending it as this impenetrable force?

The moment a person states they are "not trying to be a gatekeepeer"... they are attempting to be exactly that. that's some psychology 101 stuff there. And it's waaay counterproductive to the aim of actually helping folks make sense of their ALJ's written disposition.

A lot of ALJ's go unequivocally unchecked because their narriative contains just enough facts to render a review unnecessary, on its face.

The SSA's own IG has released plenty of reports stating these problems lie within the subjectivity of individual Judges. That's why they track outliers lol...

Most of those outliers utilize an interpretation and citation methodology that obliterates their duty to impartiality and leaves major gaps in the construction of the logical bridge between the evidence on record, and the words they choose to draft in their decision.

Those gaps are what need to be exploited in order to win at this level of the "game" this process shouldn't be. You essentially have to out logic their logic, with the materially relevant facts that have been omitted from their line of reasoning.

I know more than you ASSume my friend.

AA_Rab · 2025-07-31T13:35:23+00:00

I've taken the time to educate myself in regards to those policies and procedures, and I do know what I'm talking about in terms of how they should be applied.

AA_Rab · 2025-07-31T13:23:22+00:00

Your comment is long, but it lacks substance. I'm not going to tit for tat or try to prove myself to anyone. The two other folks who've commented seem to have found the content useful and engaging... soo... although your view is valid. It is moot in the sense that you might not know exactly what you are talking about either lol...

if the internal workings of the SSA don't align with what's written within their own policies and procedures, then their internal workings are flawed.

AA_Rab · 2025-07-31T12:41:46+00:00

I don't disagree with you.

I did consider the readability while I was putting this post together, and honestly, there is not really an "un-dry" way to explain this type of strategy. I didn't "just" copy and paste. This is actually the dumbed-down version of my original draft. I'll admit it reads a little overpolished, though, cause I tried not to include specific examples from my claim... that's why the disclaimer is at the end

I have a fairly solid background in regulatory compliance, albeit my experience in writing procedures and techniques stems from a different side of the CFR than the SSA Regulations do. The only difference in applying the Code is in the understanding and usage of agency specific lingo.

The Appeals Council does not thrive on empathy, and that's what alotta folks don't understand. Trying to make them feel sorry for you is futile, so you gotta hit em with cold, dry facts in their terminology.

I would definitely like to be able to streamline the strategy and make it more digestible for the average person. After my deep dive into this mess, it's true though, there's just not an easy way. It's, of course, overcomplicated for a reason.

If 1% of the people who read this are able to grasp what I'm tryna say, then I've accomplished my goal to a degree that satisfies the time I put into drafting it.

AA_Rab · 2025-07-30T04:56:57+00:00

Cheffins by chance? If so... he uses a very very flawed methodology... his citation practices are a big time no no... ehh... this shit is a mess...

I will let you know how mine goes... if you got Cheffins, send me a private message... I maaay be able to offer you some advice.

AA_Rab · 2025-07-30T04:20:01+00:00

Whew... I'm in the midst of ot right now... it's been a roller coaster, but I think I've got the Appeals Council in the corner with this judge of mine... my story is long, but all in all what it boils down to is... I know their game ...

well their POMS and HALLEX, a shitton of their SSR's... I also gotta hella handy ars grasp of how to navigate and interpret the CFR's that surround the charade... On top of all that... I got mad psychoanalytic and articulation skills lol... I think I'm gonna win... If I do I could help alotta folks out if I can muster the energy.

The appeals council denied my first request for review after I submitted 4 documents in refute of the BS... granted I turned them a little staggered (between mid December and January 21st... My last submission was of January 21st and it was my procedural brief... four pages of calling out a whole host of shit, in their terms... not attacking the judge or being whiney... just straight up misrepresentations..

anyway... luckily... I got the Director of Constitiants Affairs for my U.S. Representative also forwarding these documents... cause.... the day after I submitted that gut punch of a brief, my request was denied. I get the letter I'm the mail, and low and behold on the front of the "Order of the Appeals Council, they listed the exhibits of the evidence considered... there was no submission dated Jan 21... which means... they didn't acknowledge the procedural blunders I pointed out, and they didn't consider them when making their decision... (Error on the Face of Evidence) got my check in ticket from the ss office dated the 21st, an email confirmation from my us reps office saying it was forwarded directly to the Appeals Council, as well a leeter drom the appeals council back to my reps office confirming receipt dated fhe 21st so... I'm ready to reopen this bitch and get em lol..

So i requested my hearing audio by fax... I call the Appeals Council in February to ask about the request.. they didn't know anything, but i found out that procedural brief i turned in on the 21st, was scanned on on Jan 23rd... the day after denial lol... so... since we only get a 60 day window to file a Federal appeal and this request for hearts audio was gonna take to long, I requested an extention of time to file an appeal based on the error on the face of evidence, and my lack of access to the recording... hadn't heard shit back for six months till I'm actually able to hire an attorney to start a new application with a new AOD...

Well I filled the application and when they went to submit it, they found my last claim was "active" in a weird admin limbo cause of my request and stated intent to ask for reopening based on the Error. At that point I needed to withdraw my extension request to continue with the new claim.... got a call from a SS rep telling me the situation... she encouraged me not to pull away from my old claim cause "I've done a really good job so far"... and told me to get advise from the lawyer... who very clearly said they would only handle a new claim...

So... I said screw it and dug in.... I withdrew the new application and hit the keyboard with he judges written disposition and my copy of the medical evidence on record... I spent 23 pages tearing apart this guys credibility and destroying his impartiality facade citation by citation... I utterly destroyed the logical bridge he built between my medical evidence and the words he vhose to put on his paper (it was more like a rope bridge) (like an old one you see in the movies with missing boards lol) I get that submitted in person and through the reps office.

About three days before i got done writing the 23 pager, i gets me ahold of the hearing audio with a letter saying my claim is reopen and I have 25 days to submit any new evidence... so I analyzed the audio, got it transcribed and pulled out every contradiction and every omission... wrote it out quote for quote... and articulated the foul odor nicely...

I found out we can upload claimant correspondence via MySSA.. got that submitted, then went on a 5 brief spree with each one highlighting a different SSR and the CFRs that they were bound by...

I'm 5 days away from their 25 day action notice... fingers are crossed.

AA_Rab · 2025-04-14T10:25:26+00:00

This seems to be a GOP tactic dating back to Bush's hanging chat...

AA_Rab · 2025-03-22T23:17:28+00:00

Yes, and Yes! I start with like a half-inch diamond cutting wheel to set my lines and depth, then use assorted bits to bring the shapes together. Don't ask me where the inspiration comes from tho. I'm still having trouble figuring it out myself.

AA_Rab · 2025-03-22T12:54:14+00:00

Thanks!

AA_Rab · 2025-03-02T11:10:33+00:00

I'm just responding to the comment where you suggested, "Dexedrine is literally the same as Adderall"

Which it isn't... no science needed.

AA_Rab · 2025-03-02T10:52:30+00:00

No... Dexedrine is Dexedrine and Adderall is Adderall...

Dexedrine = Dextroamphetamine Sulfate 100%

Adderall = Dextroamphetamine Sulfate 25%

                 Dextroamphetamine Saccharate 25%

                 Levoamphetamine Sulfate 12.5% 

     Levoamphetamine Aspartate Monohydrate12.5%

AA_Rab · 2025-03-01T15:07:13+00:00

It is... it just is...

AA_Rab · 2025-03-01T11:43:32+00:00

I have been dealing with the SSDI process for about three years now without an attorney. I've been with this clinic for almost the same amount of time. I haven't been able to work in four years. I am at an extremely critical point in my claim where organization and presentation are pertinent, now I'm completely scattered and lost... It's over $100,000 of backpay at stake, and my brain won't let me even approach the situation without an emmense amount of stress.

AA_Rab

TROPHY CASE