Myler Disability, LLC

Revdex.com:
I have reviewed the response made by the business in reference to complaint ID ***, and find that this resolution is satisfactory to me.The certified letter finally arrived to us today, Saturday, February 13,Thank you for your assistance in resolving this issue
Sincerely,
*** ***

I have attempted several times to get ahold of this person to see why he has such odious things to say about Myler DisabilityUnfortunately, he has not answered any of my calls or returned any of my messages. After reviewing his complaint, as well as our internal records, I can say with
absolute certainty that this complaint is baseless and should not be taken seriously. An internal audit reveals that this individual made an inquiry on our website on September 3, and asked to be contacted in regards to filing a disability claim with Social Security. This happened to be on the Saturday of Labor Day weekend. Also during Labor Day weekend, this individual called our office and left a voice message asking that we contact him for possible representation in a disability case. This voice message was entered into our lead system on Tuesday, September 6th. Because two separate leads had been received during the weekend, we treated this as though there were two separate leads from two separate individuals. On Tuesday, September 6th we attempted to contact this individual through the contact information from both leads we had received over the weekend. The individual was reached by both the teams trying to contact him. Both teams attempted to verify if this individual qualified for disability benefits under our criteria for new clients and both determined that he did not.While we realize it may have been annoying for this individual to be contacted more than once, it only happened because he submitted multiple leads to our office. Also, while he may be unhappy that we did not take his case, it was because he did not meet our office criteria. This does not make our office "a spam operation of low ethical lawyers," but rather an organization that only wishes to represent those who are truly disabled and likely eligible for benefits from Social Security.I am happy to address this matter further with this individual if he wishes to contact me. Until then, I consider the matter resolved

Revdex.com:
I have reviewed the response made by the business in reference to complaint ID ***, and find that this resolution is satisfactory to meI will contact Myler Disability and or Social Security with further questions should they arise
Sincerely,
*** ***

Complaint: ***
I am rejecting this response because:I appreciate the prompt phone call after Myler received our complaint via Revdex.comThe gentleman informed us that a confirmation letter was already in the mail regarding the release of any claim to a feeHe said he would put another letter in the mail though, just to be sure we have written verificationUnfortunately, we have not yet received either of the written correspondences.
Sincerely,
*** ***

We have attempted several times since receiving this complaint to reach out to this individual to discuss his concerns and reassure him that he was dealing with a legitimate Social Security Disability representative's office. He has not answered any of our calls or returned any of our
messages. If after reading this response he'd like to discuss this further, he can contact us at 1-800-652-On or around June 2, 2017, this individual submitted an online inquiry regarding a disability claim for Social Security disability benefitsHe provided his name and phone number and asked to be contacted. We were able to get ahold of him on June 5, and after an awkward exchange where he accused us of being scammers, we let him know that we will not be contacting him again. Shortly after this phone conversation, he submitted this complaint on the Revdex.com website.Myler Disability helps disabled individuals in all stages of the application and litigation process as they attempt to obtain disability benefits through the Social Security Administration. Our marketing is done primarily online and potential clients can visit a website and request a consultation with a member of our staff. Once the individual gives permission to be contacted, we give them a call and discuss possible representation on a disability claim. Here, we only contacted this individual because he had submitted an inquiry on our website. While we appreciate his concern and caution in regards to his personal information, we can assure him that we're one of the biggest and oldest Social Security disability advocacy groups in the country and we've been helping disabled individuals for many, many years. If he needs help with his disability claim, we'd be happy to discuss this further with him. He can reach us at the number listed above

I will be awaiting the refund to post to social security, I will call social security periodically to check on it
Revdex.com:
I have reviewed the response made by the business in reference to complaint ID ***, and find that this resolution is satisfactory to me
Sincerely,
*** ***

Revdex.com:
I have reviewed the response made by the business in reference to complaint ID [redacted], and find that this resolution is satisfactory to me.
Sincerely,
[redacted]

Thank you for bringing this matter to my attention.  I was able to speak with this client and his wife earlier this week and was able to resolve their concerns.  Both of these fine people are aware that if other questions or concerns arise that my staff is unable to resolve, I am always...

happy to take their call.   The disability application process with the Social Security Administration (SSA) is very lengthy and for the average claimant, it takes around 24 months from the time they file for benefits before a hearing is scheduled in front of an administrative law judge.  This is due to the large volume of disability claims that are filed with the SSA each year and the ever-increasing backlog that SSA faces.  While we want each of our clients to have their case resolved as soon as possible, the sad reality is that little can be done to speed up the process.  With this client, he has been frustrated with how long his case is taking. However, the time he has been waiting is not any longer than what all other Social Security claimants with similar pending claims in his area have been waiting.  We anticipate that he will have a hearing with an administrative law judge by the end of the summer.  SSA currently shows his claim as "ready to schedule," meaning that we expect a call from the judge's clerk any day to get this put on the docket.  As soon as that happens, we'll begin final hearing preparations with our client and have him as ready as possible for his hearing.  While there have been misunderstandings between this client and my staff, I feel that these issues have been resolved.  These issues may be due, in large part, to the mental health difficulties this client is facing, along with his stressful life circumstances.  I take great efforts to help my staff understand the difficulties that many of our clients are facing and I hope they show sympathy and compassion when dealing with each client, even the irate ones. If there are other questions or concerns in this matter, please let me know. I'm always happy to speak with our clients and answer any questions or resolve any concerns they may have.

Thank you for sharing this information with Myler Disability.  I have spoken with this client today and will be sending her new representation paperwork so that we can continue to help her with her pending disability claim.  We withdrew from this case because we had been unable to contact...

this client.  This was after making many, many attempts over a 90 day period and eventually had to withdraw for lack of contact because we were unable to properly make final preparations for her upcoming hearing.  The phone numbers we had been calling appeared to be valid, but the calls were not being answered and the voice messages were not being returned.  We found this odd because we had been able to communicate with her on these numbers in the past.  Eventually, because we were unable to re-establish contact with her, we were unable to prepare her case for a hearing and withdrew our representation.  Shortly before filing her information with the Revdex.com, the client obtained a new phone number, which was included in the information the Revdex.com emailed our office.  With this new number, I was able to re-establish contact with this client.  After explaining why my office had withdrawn as her representatives, she voiced understanding and I agreed to have my office begin representing her again.We are grateful that the Revdex.com was able to help us re-establish contact with this client and we look forward to helping her with her pending claim.  If there are any further matters that need to be resolved, please contact me. Dan B.

Thank you for bringing this matter to our attention.  My staff spoke with this client the day she sent this inquiry to the Revdex.com (coincidentally) and since that time, I have personally spoken with her, too.  Her frustration and concern had to do with how long Social Security takes to process...

disability claims.  Her claim is currently pending before Social Security's Office of Disability Adjudication and Review (ODAR) in their Fayetteville, NC office.  As of today, the average hearing wait time for that office is 19 months.  This client's request for hearing was filed in September 2014, so she probably still has a little bit of a wait before ODAR schedules her hearing.  It is quite common for claimants seeking help from Social Security to get frustrated with how long the process takes.  It's equally frustrating for their attorneys and representatives and often there is very little that can be done to speed up the process.  When I spoke with this client about her Revdex.com letter, she said that she now understood what the average wait times were for ODAR and how it is not my office that is slowing the process down.  She was very courteous and understanding during our phone conversation and she knows that she can call our office at any time if she has further questions or concerns.  We will continue to work on her claim and give her regular updates on the status of her case.If there are other questions or concerns, please let me know.

I have tried multiple times to reach this client since being made aware of his complaint.  He has not returned any of my calls or messages.  I would much rather discuss this matter with him before providing a response, but as he has not afforded me that opportunity I am left with no choice...

but to submit my response at this time.  Should he want to discuss this matter with me, he is welcome to call me at any time.Our company represented this individual in his application for Social Security Disability Income (SSDI)  and Supplemental Security Income (SSI) benefits with the Social Security Administration.  His case was eventually heard by an Administrative Law Judge (ALJ) in Seattle, WA on August 3, 2015.  On November 10, 2015, the ALJ issued an unfavorable decision, denying this client his SSDI and SSI benefits, finding that while he did suffer from a number of severe impairments, he would still be capable of performing a limited range of light and sedentary duty jobs.  This client now complains to the Revdex.com that our office has charged him for medical records that he personally provided, that we did not put full effort into his representation, and that we are somehow entangled in some type of scam with the Social Security Administration and are working with them to find ways to deny his case.  All of his allegations are completely false and without merit.   Let me address each allegation:First, this client says that because he brought medical records to his hearing on August 3, 2015, he is being improperly billed by my office.  This is incorrect and I feel that if he had afforded me the opportunity to discuss it with him, I could have clarified any uncertainty he feels.  There are 4 medical record requests that our office received invoices for as we prepared his case.  In the course of representing clients seeking SSDI and/or SSI benefits, we request medical records from all the medical facilities that the client has seen since alleging disability and often these facilities send an invoice and charge a processing fee.  As part of our fee agreement with our clients, they agree to reimburse our office for these invoices.  Here, 3 of 4 invoices we received were for records covering office visits after August 3, 2015 (and therefore couldn't have been provided by the client on that date).  The 4th was for medical records covering a large span of time prior to August 3, 2015 and were not the records that the client says he provided.Part of our job as representatives is to make sure all relevant medical records get submitted.  This is exactly what we were able to accomplish with this case and we passed along an invoice to the client to have him reimburse us for what the medical facilities had charged us.  This was exactly as he had agreed upon in the fee agreement he signed with our office.Second, the client says that we did not put full effort into his representation.  This, too, is incorrect.  The mere fact that he did not get awarded benefits by Social Security does not indicate that he was not zealously represented.  In each of these cases there is a winner and a loser.  It is in our best interest as a company to win as many cases as possible, as we work on a contingency basis and only get paid when we win.  If there's a way to win, we look for it and try our best to make it happen.  At the end of the day, however, it always come down to whether the ALJ believes the client when he/she says they can't work.  Here, the ALJ didn't believe our client.  Due to confidentiality matters, I won't cite the reasons why the ALJ didn't believe him, but if this client would like to discuss the matter further with me, I'd love to talk to him. Third, the client suggests that our office is part of some type of "scam" with the Social Security Administration, where we "work together against" him and other clients.  Such a comment is obviously false and I assume our client only stated this because he was frustrated that he had not been awarded disability benefits.  While there may be some conspiracy theorists out there that truly believe our federal government is actively teaming up with companies in the private sector to ensure that US citizens are denied due process, this client does not seem to fit this mold.  Rather, I assume frustration due to his financial situation and medical issues has made him say a few things that he normally wouldn't.  As with everything he has brought up in his Revdex.com complaint, I'd be happy to talk to him about this and help him better understand what is going on.  It is unfortunate that he has not returned any of my calls.Based on the foregoing, I think it's quite clear that our company is doing all it can to help resolve this client's concerns, but he is choosing not to return our calls.  We regret that his case wasn't approved, but for us to give this client meaningful advice and counsel on what options he has, he needs to discuss his concerns with us in private, not on a public forum such as the Revdex.com website.Thanks for bringing this matter to our attention.  If further information is needed, please let me know.Dan B[redacted]

Revdex.com:
I have reviewed the response made by the business in reference to complaint ID [redacted], and find that this resolution is satisfactory to me.
Myler Law Firm has made an attempt to resolve this dispute, although they have unjustifiably directed the blame on me. It is NOT clear, from my standpoint, that anyone sold my contact information to two (2) companies. I was told specifically by the person who answered my call (see my original written complaint above) that this marketing firm sold my information, without my knowledge or permission, to ONE (1) company. It would be better for Myler Disability to call these numbers themselves than to make the assertion that the company sold my information, again, without my knowledge or permission, to two companies.I do not appreciate Myler's use of the terms, "angry and upset." I merely complained about harassing phone calls. Most people do not appreciate them. I remember the day when lawyers considered it unethical to advertise. This type of marketing and advertisement certainly raises questions about where the decision to advertise has taken the profession.I will consider this issue resolved since the phone calls have stopped, but I have this one last question for Myler Law Firm to consider which I would like to go on record. If Myler is not to blame, them why when I called the firm was I told by the receptionist there that she had removed my name but that it took a day or two to process the information, the same message I got when I had called the 985 phone number?  I also wonder why, when Myler allegedly calls this 985 number he gets a different company than I do? When I called the number, I got a recorded message that identified the source of the calls as as "Social Security Disability Advocates." If Myler really wanted to resolve this issue the firm would call the 800 numbers I provided above and find out from NOLO who was selling what to whom. I continue to find the whole thing very underhanded and unethical, but since the calls have stopped, I will consider this issue resolved.
Sincerely,
[redacted]

I have been unable to speak with this individual on the phone, but if he has further questions or concerns after reading this reply, he is welcome to give me a call. In this case, the client is upset that Social Security denied his claim for disability benefits. Unfortunately, he was denied because...

the administrative law judge (ALJ) found that he was not disabled on or before March 31, 2014, his “date last insured.”In Social Security Disability cases, a claimant has the burden of proving that he became disabled prior to his “date last insured,” or DLI. A DLI is generally 5 years after the claimant stops working full time. If disability is not established until after that date, Social Security will not issue disability payments.Here, this client’s full time earnings ended years ago and based on his work history, his DLI was March 31, 2014. He filed for Social Security Disability benefits in April 2014 and eventually had a hearing before an ALJ in August 2017. Because the medical evidence prior to the DLI was vague, the ALJ scheduled a medical expert who testified that prior to March 31, 2014, the client’s conditions were not disabling. While the conditions may have become disabling after that date, Social Security cannot issue disability payments.Prior to the hearing, we worked with the client to make sure all relevant medical evidence had been obtained and submitted. When the ALJ held the hearing, all relevant medical records were part of the official exhibit file. Our attorney presented the case to the ALJ, cross examined the medical expert, and did all he could to argue the evidence in a light most favorable to the client. Unfortunately, the ALJ disagreed and denied benefits.Please note that he did not lose because of any lack of preparedness on our part. Nor did he lose because of any missing medical records that were relevant to the time period in question. He lost because the ALJ did not believe his conditions became disabling until after the DLI.

I apologize that the letter in question
has not been received by these nice people. I assume it is due to
winter weather and slow delivery times with the U.S. Postal Service.
I spoke with this client on Friday, January 29, 2016 and wrote him a
letter that day re-explaining that my office had waived its right to
collect a fee if his case is later won. I have checked with my
staff and it appears the letter did not go out until Monday, February
1 (which isn't a surprise), due to the time of day when I spoke with
the client on January 29th. I have instructed staff to
send out another letter today, this time via certified mail.
I have also spoken with this client
today and explained that the first letter is on its way and a second
copy should follow shortly. In addition, I read to him the entire
letter and let him know that if there are any questions or concerns
to call me.
If anything further is needed, please
let me know.

I have had the opportunity to talk with this former client's significant other and I believe I now have a better understanding of what his concerns are.  After our conversation, I believe that this matter is resolved.We represented this gentleman in his pursuit of disability benefits through...

Social Security until October 2016, when he terminated our services and hired another attorney to help him with the rest of the disability process.  When we withdrew, we did not waive our right to collect a fee for the services we had rendered on the claim.  We helped him file his disability claim, helped him through the initial and reconsideration stages of the process, and filed his request for hearing with an administrative law judge.  We had also begun obtaining and submitting his updated medical records.  While there was still a significant amount of work that needed to be done before his case was heard by an administrative law judge, we were well into the process and would have continued representing him until the job was complete.  Our fee agreement with this gentlemen was exactly like it is with all of our clients.  We are only paid if the claim is approved, and then only if the fee is approved by Social Security.  Here, because this gentleman used 2 different attorneys during the application process, Social Security will be determining how much of the fee goes to each attorney.  This gentleman WILL NOT be charged twice for work done, but rather Social Security will be determining how much of the total fee should go to each attorney.  This will be determined through Social Security's fee petition process and both my office and the other attorney will need to file fee petitions, outlining the work we completed on the case.  I believe that this gentleman's frustrations were based on his false belief that Social Security would be withholding double the normal attorney fees from his benefits.  This simply isn't the case.  Rather, ONE fee will be withheld and Social Security will determine how much of it should go to my office and how much should go to the other attorney.  As of right now, my office has not been paid a single cent for the work we completed on this case.  Furthermore, we won't be paid a single cent unless it is first approved by Social Security.  The fee petition process outlined above is designed to resolve these types of issues and here, that's exactly what will happen.We appreciate the service this gentleman has given to our country.  He's a great American and we're glad we were able to help him for as long as we did.  If there are other questions or concerns, please let us know.

Thank you for bringing this matter to our attention. The issue in question is why our office has been calling the phone number listed in the complaint, which ends with [redacted]. Due to the nature of this complaint, I have decided it's probably best to not contact this individual and rather simply...

reply to the Revdex.com complaint. If after reading my reply she is not satisfied, I am more than happy to talk to her.
The [redacted] number in question was provided to us by one of our clients from Bluefield, VA as an alternate contact number. Because we have been attempting to contact our client and have been unsuccessful at her primary phone number, we have attempted to call this [redacted] number.
Our records indicate that in the last 30 days, we have called this number 3 times: May 21, June 4 and June 17. None of these calls were answered and we left a voice message each time.
We are now aware that this [redacted] is not a number that our client can be reached at. It has since been removed from our client's records and we will therefore never call it again. We have also had our IT Department make it so that our phone system cannot dial this number, making future calls from our office impossible.
We are sorry for any inconvenience these voice messages caused the complaintant. We only called this number because our client had provided it to us as an alternate contact number. Our phone calls were not an attempt to solicit a product or any services. We have taken every possible measure to make sure we never call this number again.
If there are any other questions or concerns regarding this issue, please let me know.

Thank you for bringing this matter to our attention. I have reviewed this matter and have also spoken with this client.  The issue was resolved prior to her filing the Revdex.com complaint, as I will outline below.   This client contacted Myler Disability in February 2016 for help...

representing her in a disability claim with Social Security, which she had already filed on her own.  While she was waiting for our new client paperwork in the mail, Social Security contacted her and said they were approving her claim for SSI benefits.  Shortly thereafter, she signed and returned her new client paperwork to Myler Disability, which was filed with Social Security upon receipt.  It took Social Security until the end of June 2016 to finish processing this client's SSI claim.  In early July 2016, approval paperwork was sent and Social Security paid Myler Disability a fee based on the fee agreement signed by the client.  Because Social Security had informed the client that they would be approving this claim prior to her signing the new client paperwork from Myler Disability, we agree that the fee we received from her SSI claim should be returned.  We've never disagreed with the client on this point and have been working with Social Security to verify the dates involved here (as we always have to verify this type of information before issuing a refund).  Once we verified this information, we issued a refund check to the Everett, WA Social Security District Office.   In our experience, it can take a Social Security District Office several weeks, to even a month of more, to show receipt of a refund check.  We will continue to follow up with them to make sure it is received and accounted for.  In the mean time, we will continue to represent this client on her other claim with Social Security. The only point in the original Revdex.com complaint that I wish to rebut is the statement that "Myler is refusing to return their [unentitled] payment back to Social Security."  As can be seen above, this is untrue because the check was returned as soon as we were able to verify with Social Security the correct dates in the approval process.  I have discussed this in great detail today with the client and I feel that both she and I are on the same page when I say this matter is resolved.  If she has further questions or concerns, she is welcome to contact me directly.  In the mean time, we will continue to represent her on her other claim.

Complaint: [redacted]
I am rejecting this response because: I'm rejecting this because he did not make several attempts to contact me the lawyer.  My phone shows two attempts to call me to resolve complaint.So that is not accurate. Also I am being given 30 minutes to write this. I am on over a dozen medications that won't allow me to respond properly in that amount of time. In my opinion I think this complaint be taken seriously. The lawyer that contacted me could not or would not tell me why I didn't fit their criteria. The initial representative said I had to many assets.  I have been seriously in debt for years.  This is what I was referring to cherry pickers. I would like my option posted for other people to see. I dont want any money or any more phone calls from them. I can't debate with a lawyer. I cannot afford any debate other than email. I believe if other people read this they might stand up and write in also. This is my opinion. And have no drive to profit from it. Again not enough time to respond. Thank you.
Sincerely,
[redacted]