Skip to comments.The latest Social Security horror story
Posted on 06/22/2015 6:10:41 PM PDT by BenLurkin
Instead of accepting their application for benefits to begin at age 70, the agency's representative instead gives the person a six-month retroactive payment! This act resets the person's entitlement back to what it was six months prior and wipes out half a year of Delayed Retirement Credits (DRCs). The person loses 4 percent off their monthly benefit check in exchange for a six-month lump-sum payment they didn't ask for and don't want.
"Based on SSA regulations, retroactivity is automatically applied to applications filed after FRA unless retroactivity is expressly restricted by the claimant," he wrote. "If this is a conspiracy, frontline SSA employees are not in on it, so I wouldn't throw them under the bus. They just try their best to enforce the rules as written by the higher-ups."
Anyone who wants to get all of his or her DRCs must expressly tell Social Security not to provide retroactive benefits. Social Security's default assumption is that you want to receive retroactive benefits.
This really takes the cake. It's bad enough that staffers at Social Security don't understand why people should and would want to delay their benefit receipt. But then, when you tell them you want to take your benefit starting at 70, they decide you should have taken it earlier and change your application to something you didn't request. We're wondering how many of these "mistakes" get made every day and how many of those making these mistakes ever get fired.
(Excerpt) Read more at cnbc.com ...
I bet they get the paperwork right to make sure the invading hoard gets every penny available and then some.
“Carried out, it finally amounts to this, which I also believe, that government is best which governs not at all; and when men are prepared for it, that will be the kind of government which they will have.”
Henry David Thoreau
And if you continue to work and make $35000 they tax 85% of your Social Security at 25%!
Sorry, making mistakes, intentional or otherwise, is never grounds for termination. Not with the gov’t.
Starting the DAY I’m eligible. Won’t be there for those who wait.
That’s what I did. My break even age is 82. I’m glad I’m starting at 62.
Lets say you can get 2,000 a month at FRA (66?) but file and suspend.
Lets say you decide to take retroactive at 69 yrs & 11 months.
You get the full retro(approx 94,000) but your benefits will @ 70 will be as if you retired @ 66 or 2000 a month.
another trick is if both spouses are at FRA.
The husband with the larger amount at FRA files for 2000 a month,
The spouse with the lesser amount can now file a spousal benefit under her husband for 1000 a month and her own benefits will be suspended. If she waits until 70, she gets her own benefits that have continued to accrue.
America, what a country.
Wife retired at 63 and started immediately. I retired at 62 and did same. Very few benefit by waiting and then getting the higher rates and with the crap-shoot it's becoming, early guarantees at least some return for all the money they "withheld for our own good".
If male Bruce Jenner can be a “transgendered” woman and caucasian Rachel Dolezal can be “transracial” african-american, why can’t I - in my early 50’s - be “transretired” if I feel 72 most mornings? I mean, I believe it’s essential to my emotional well being and mental health that the Govt and the public consider and treat me as if I were 72 starting today.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.