3 ms·
Has it occurred to you to read the act? It's readily available. Certificates of death can be considered, but they're not controlling. On the contrary, you can
by nknighthb 13y ago
Has it occurred to you to read the act? It's readily available. Certificates of death can be considered, but they're not controlling.
On the contrary, you can find a very clear, unambiguous statement that such certificates are not controlling in the SSA's policy documents[1]:
"Give the court's declaration of death based on a presumption great weight depending on the supporting evidence, but is not controlling. The number holder may not be presumed dead for purposes of Social Security until he or she has been missing for 7 years and the presumption of death is not rebutted as instructed in GN 00304.050A.1., in this section."
And this isn't just about him wanting to be declared alive -- the Social Security Administration is going to want back the benefits it paid out, and it's going to want to sue him and his family to get them, not the other way around.
[1] https://secure.ssa.gov/poms.nsf/lnx/0200304050 https://secure.ssa.gov/poms.nsf/lnx/0200304050
- anigbrowl 13y agoNone of which has any bearing on his being legally dead in Ohio. I'm not sure what point you think you're arguing, since nobody is claiming that the SSA is powerless to act.
- nknighthb 13y agoDid you read the thread? > Well, it's a might bit hard for the SSA to collect if the guy is not alive. For that matter, do you remember what you wrote just a few hours ago? > Has it occurred to you that the text of the Social Security Act probably predicates the life/death status of a person on the determination made by the state? I don't care if he's legally dead in Ohio. I was never arguing about that. It is, in fact, entirely irrelevant to any point I've been making. Whatever argument you think you're having with me is all in your head.