How “Sequestration” Will Delay Your Social Security Disability Claim- Part II

March 6th, 2013

In what way will “sequestration” affect your social security disability claim?

Social Security has advised the National Organization of Social Security Claimant’s Representatives (NOSSCR) in a “Fact Sheet” that the cut in their budget by the Budget Control Act will only delay your case by about six weeks.  But, it appears that budget cut will delay your case much longer than SSA’s estimate.

That is because, the Social Security Administration also has advised that it will lose 5,000 employees as a result of the budget cuts.

Since there is such a backlog of cases already, this will only make the situation worse.  As it is, in Baltimore, it takes about 15 months to get a hearing before a Administrative Law Judge, from the time your file reaches the Hearing Office in Baltimore City, http://www.ssa.gov/appeals/DataSets/05_Average_Processing_Time_Report.html

The delay is about the same 15 months when your case is heard in Dover, Delaware and about 12 months, if your case is heard in Washington, D.C., http://www.ssa.gov/appeals/DataSets/01_NetStat_Report.html .

If you are too sick to work and cannot pay your mortgage or you have no health insurance, 12 to 15 months is already an unacceptable amount of time.  And, if you add the time necessary to get through the first two stages of a claim, you have to add another year to 18 months. According to the Social Security Administration’s website, only about 28% of claims are approved at the Application level, and only 3% more are won at the second step, called Request for Reconsideration, http://www.ssa.gov/policy/docs/statcomps/di_asr/2011/sect04.pdf

Therefore, the reality is that most people have to get to a hearing in front of a Judge in order to win their case and that this will take 2 to 3 years.

Meanwhile, many of these disabled people will lose their house or apartment, be forced to borrow from their family or have to file bankruptcy, while they wait for the benefits for which they worked.

Any delay caused by the sequestration will be detrimental for people who are already financially, physically and psychologically vulnerable.  They are the victims of “sequestration.”

 

 

 

¡Este ladrón quien fue tonto- el dejó su hija a casa que se robó!

January 14th, 2013

Yo encontré  esta historia en el periódico Mundo Latino en Baltimore, Maryland. (Yo tengo un anuncio en este periódico por mi negocios.)

Porque que historia esta moy chistoso, yo quise le compartir contigo.  Yo encontré esta historia tambien a emol.com, un sitio de red para noticias de Chile.

Aqui esta el  enlace por la página-  http://www.emol.com/noticias/internacional/2012/12/31/577045/argentina-ladron-se-olvida-de-su-hija-dentro-de-la-casa-a-la-que-entro-a-robar.html.  ¡Por favor, disfrute!

Argentina: Ladrón se olvida de su hija dentro de la casa a la que entró a robar

La policía llegó al lugar y constató el hurto de electrodomésticos y otros bienes, pero hallaron también a una niña de 4 años.

BUENOS AIRES.- Un ladrón olvidó a su hija, de cuatro años, dentro de la casa a la que había entrado a robar en la ciudad argentina de San Francisco, en el centro del país, informaron hoy fuentes policiales.

El hecho ocurrió este domingo, cuando un hombre ingresó en una vivienda de esa ciudad de la central provincia de Córdoba aprovechando la ausencia de los moradores.

Pero los vecinos advirtieron la presencia del ladrón y dieron aviso a la policía y a los dueños de la casa.

Cuando los efectivos policiales llegaron al lugar, constataron el hurto de electrodomésticos y otros bienes, pero se encontraron dentro de la casa con una niña de 4 años, hija del ladrón.

Fuentes policiales citadas por la agencia oficial Télam indicaron que el hombre, que resultó ser un vecino de la zona, fue apresado y quedó a disposición de la Justicia.

We will miss Judge Ann Brobst of Baltimore County Circuit Court

December 20th, 2012

It was indeed tragic to hear that Judge Anne Brobst passed away this week.  Therefore, I am posting an article that I wrote for the Baltimore County Bar Association Advocate monthly magazine in February, 2010.  After experiencing the joy of Judge Brobst’s investiture, I felt compelled to write this article.  This piece comes from the Advocate issue that can be found at   http://www.bcba.org/UserFiles/File/Advocate%20Feb%202010.pdf.              If you go to page 13 of that edition, you will see some priceless photos that I was not able to copy.  Everything in the article below is as true today as the day I wrote it.  Regrettably, the last sentence of this piece did not come true.

THE INVESTITURE OF JUDGE ANNE BROBST

I was fortunate to be present at the investiture of Judge Anne Brobst on December 16, 2009. Every investiture

has it’s own style, and Judge Brobst’s would have to be described as elegant, compassionate and energetic. Her

choice of speakers evidenced that she will be a fair-minded judge. State’s Attorney Scott Schellenberger

(her boss until her elevation to the bench) and defense attorney Lenny Shapiro, delighted the audience with

stories of their experiences with Judge Brobst.

When Judge Brobst spoke, she fondly remembered Judges Edward DeWaters and William Hinkle, and

acknowledged Judges John Hennegan and Dana Levitz’ s role models (calling Judge Levitz her “rebbe,” the

Yiddish word for “Rabbi”). She spoke lovingly of her childhood and with great devotion about her father, who

robed her, and her mother, who is deceased. Her parents were married for 50 years.

Her sensitivity, to the citizens who will appear in her court, was quite admirable. This understanding was

gleaned from serving the public as a prosecutor since 1979, including 23 years as Chief of the Circuit Court

Division of the State’s Attorney’s Office. She spoke of having to be “sympathetic” to those with less

opportunity than herself. She was sensitive to the fact that all who appear before her, whether as plaintiff or

defendant, petitioner or respondent, are in court due to a “sadness” that has touched them greatly. To help the

parties who appear before her overcome this “sadness,” ”we can make positive change one case at a time…..

with dignity, compassion and respect.”

She spoke of her appreciation of the task of the Criminal Defense bar who will appear before her and

who toil every day to obtain the best possible result for his/her client. As an attorney who represents criminal

defendants, I found Judge Brobst’s words inspiring and energizing. Her comments also reminded me of huge

responsibilities that criminal defense attorneys face on a daily basis. Because most of us are small/solo attorneys, we

do not have layers of paralegals or secretaries to shield us from the needs of our clients. This responsibility of

directly dealing with our clients and bringing them back from the precipice in their lives, is both exhausting and

invigorating. Our mission of attempting to obtain the best possible result from their “sadness” defines both us and our

profession. It is reassuring that Judge Brobst, although serving as a prosecutor for 30 years, is so sensitive to our

role in the system.

After listening to her speech, it is clear that Judge Brobst was a wonderful choice by Governor O’Malley. I wish her

good health and many years of happiness as a Judge.

If you have been sued by LVNV Funding LLC, Resurgent Capital Services, Alegis Group, Sherman Acquisition, Sherman Funding or Sherman Financial Group, your case may have been dismissed!!!

November 1st, 2011

Chief Judge Ben C. Clyburn of the District Court of Maryland signed an order on October 26, 2011 staying the cases filed by the the above companies for violations of the Maryland Collections Agency Licensing Act and the Maryland Consumer Debt Collection Act.  So, if you have been sued by any of the above named companies the litigation is terminated and you may also be able to strike the prior judgment.

Furthermore, the State of Maryland’s Collection Agency Licensing Board in the Office of the Commissioner of Financial Regulation, on October 25, 2011, issued a Summary Suspension of Collection Agency Licenses of these same companies and a number of related businesses.

According to the Summary Order to Cease and Desist and Summary Suspension of Collection Agency Licenses, issued by the Maryland State Collection Agency Licensing Board, these companies engaged in numerous collection violations including falsification of affidavits that were part of their lawsuits to collect the debts.  These included “knowingly violating the Maryland Rules of Procedure” and submitted affidavits that “artfully crafted language intended to deceive the courts and consumer defendants.”  These companies also were “requested and collecting impermissible compound interest” and were “knowingly requesting and collecting unauthorized attorney’s fees and prejudgment interest at unauthorized rates.”  In addition, the Board found that these debt buyers made “intentionally false statements…to conceal” the business relationships between the buyers and sellers of the debt.  Lastly, the Board found that LVNV filed cases in which it did not have valid title to the debts. 

Read the rest of this entry »

Three New Maryland Traffic Laws Effective October 1, 2011

October 31st, 2011

Three new laws went into effect on October 1, 2011.  Maryland drivers should be aware of these changes.

  1. Anti- texting law expanded-  Before October 1, 2011, a Maryland driver could not text while driving.  Effective October 1, 2011, the driver cannot even read a text, even when the car is stopped.  As long as your car is “in the travel portion of the roadway,”  you cannot “write, send or read a text message or an electronic message.”  This remains a secondary offense, meaning that you cannot be stopped for this offense, but you can be charged under this law, if a Police Officer has another basis for stopping you. Read the rest of this entry »

If You Are a “Person of Interest” in a Crime and The Police Ask You To Come in For an Interview, Do You Go? NO!!

October 11th, 2011

I had a client call me last week with a problem.  Her nephew was being accused of assaulting a neighbor.  There were no witnesses to the alleged event, so it was her nephew’s word against the word of the alleged victim.  The reason that my client called was that the Police called the nephew and requested that he come in to the Police Station for an interview.  My client wanted to know “Should my nephew go in for the interview.”  My answer was a resounding “NO!”

Why not?  Here is the problem.  Chances are the reason that the Police want to interview someone is to “fill in the gaps” in their case.  They hope that they can even get a confession.  Why help them solidify their case?  Something that you say can be misinterpreted and used against you. Read the rest of this entry »

Beginning January 1, 2012, if you are being sued by a debt collector, there are new Maryland rules that may help you

September 19th, 2011

The Baltimore Sun reported on September 7, 2011, that Maryland’s Court of Appeals has enacted new rules to protect Maryland debtors- http://www.baltimoresun.com/news/maryland/bs-md-court-of-appeals-rules-change-20110907,0,3294034.story .

Reading the new Rules, http://www.courts.state.md.us/rules/rodocs/ro171.pdf , at p.4 through 11, it is clear that the Court is reacting to the excesses of debt buyers who have been forced to dismiss thousands of debt collections cases. Just about ten days ago,  LVNV Funding LLC, was forced to write off about $10,000,000, in debt owed by approximately 3,500 people, as part of a class action suit, see article in Baltimore Sun

http://www.baltimoresun.com/business/bs-bz-debtors-settlement-lvnv-20110909,0,6904431.story

The new Maryland Rules, 3-306, 3-308 and 3-509, apply to all cases filed after December 31, 2011. Given the fact that tens of millions of dollars of debt were sold to debt buyer who did not know about the new Rules, the interesting question, is, “What will happen to all of that debt?” I cannot imagine that the debt buyers required the detailed records necessary now to prove their cases. Particularly, if the debt was sold more than once, the chain of paperwork may well be lacking. Debt buyers who purchase large blocks of debt may not be able to obtain the paperwork on each debt to prove their case. As a bankruptcy attorney who is consulted by debtors on a daily basis, I will recommend to them, even more so than in the past, that they should go to court and demand strict proof of the purchased debt. It will be a brave new world after January 1, 2012.
Many of the new requirements in the overhauled Rules specifically do not apply to original creditors. In contrast, if suit is filed by a plaintiff who is not the original creditor, this debt buyer will have to either show: (1)proof of the original debt with proof of debtor’s signature; (2) a bill with actual purchases; or (3) proof from the original creditor of the debt.
The requirements on the debt buyers will now be extremely high. The new Rules may even discourage many companies from buying debt of Maryland residents.
Here are some of the changes:
If the plaintiff wants to get a judgment by affidavit and is not the original creditor, it will have to show the chain of custody of the debt from the original creditor until plaintiff’s purchase of the debt as well as a bill of sale for each sale in the chain.
If the plaintiff attempts to obtain an Affidavit Judgment, by submitting records without a trial, and is making a claim for interest on the debt and/or attorney fees, the plaintiff will have to submit the following:
1. an interest worksheet that follows a new form to be prescribed by the Chief Judge of the District Court;
2. “sufficient proof evidencing” the claim for attorneys’ fees, and that the fees are “reasonable,” Rule 3-306 (c);
3. an “Assigned Consumer Debt Checklist,” based on another new form to be created by the Chief Judge of the District Court;
4. all necessary documents to comply with the new Checklist (the documents must be “clearly numbered and referenced per Rule 3-306 (d));
5. In addition, the Plaintiff will need to submit one of the following:
a.  a document signed by the defendant evidencing the debt or that the account was opened;
b.  a bill of sale, purchases, payments or other use of the credit card or account; or
c.  an electronic printout of such purchases or payments;
6.  plaintiff will have to submit a “chronological listing of all the prior owners of the debt” and the applicable dates and a certified or “properly authenticating bill of sale” for each transfer;

7.  the Affidavit will have to include the name and last four digits of the account number for the original creditor and the nature of the debt;

8.  if the account was charged off, the Affidavit will need to include information as to when and the amount of the charge-off, as well as an itemization of additional fees and payments made after charge off and the date of last payment; and

9.  (in direct response to companies such as LVNV Funding, who were not licensed properly as a debt collector when they filed suit), the plaintiff must include in the Affidavit their Maryland debt collection licensing numbers and dates issued.

So, if the Debtor files a Notice of Intention to Defend and there is a trial, what does a Plaintiff have to prove? According to the new Rules, if a plaintiff is not the original creditor, the Court “shall consider the requirements” listed in (1) through (9) above before granting a judgment. What does it mean that the Judge should “consider the requirements”? The new Rules give the Judge a certain amount of flexibility, but, clearly, some Plaintiffs, who bought debt that was sold three or four times, will not be able to obtain judgments against the debtors.
So, listen up all Maryland debtors- if you are sued after December 31, 2011, and the plaintiff is a company who bought the debt from your credit card company or store, GO TO COURT and make them prove their case. You nave nothing to lose by going to Court and you just might be surprised to find that that debt buyer cannot prove their case! The devil (and the debt) is in the details.  :)

If you have a debt that has been turned over or bought by LVNV Funding, then you may not be liable

September 10th, 2011

If you are being sued by an attorney for LVNV Funding or LVNV Funding is trying to collect a bill from you, then you should be aware that they have dropped about 3500 cases according to the following article reported in the Baltimore Sun today. See the below link for more information or calling my office with any questions. I was not involved in the cases but will be glad to explain the ramifications to you. Congrats to the attorneys who resolved these cases for the consumers. Here is the link- http://www.baltimoresun.com/business/bs-bz-debtors-settlement-lvnv-20110909,0,6904431.story