Google Groups no longer supports new Usenet posts or subscriptions. Historical content remains viewable.
Dismiss

SSDI direct deposit code 310?

9,650 views
Skip to first unread message

BetaB4

unread,
Aug 18, 2009, 12:39:00 PM8/18/09
to
Our nonprofit organization is the representative payee for a 23 year old
male who is receiving SSDI benefits -- about $610/month. We only do this
for this one person (long story), so we don't know much about how the system
works.

Recently, a large deposit from Social Security showed up in his bank
account -- more than $25,000. All of his regular monthly direct deposits
show up on the bank statement as: "AC-US Treasury 303 - Soc Sec". The large
deposit shows up on the bank statement as: "AC-US Treasury 310 - Soc Sec".
We don't know what the deposit is for and thought that it may have been a
mistake, made either by the bank or by SSA. We called the SSA, and they
confirmed that the deposit was made by them, but so far, the person on the
phone couldn't tell what it is for. We'll probably go in person and try to
figure it out with them.

But, in the meantime, I am wondering if the different deposit code of "310"
instead of the normal "303" is a clue as to what type of payment it is.
This young man was in our residential program as an adolescent, and one of
our social workers took him to the SSA to help him apply for SSDI a couple
of years ago.

Is it possible that the large deposit is some kind of retroactive payment
for benefits, possible from when he turned 18 until he started getting
benefits at age 20?

Jack

unread,
Aug 18, 2009, 12:56:26 PM8/18/09
to
On Tue, 18 Aug 2009 12:39:00 -0400, "BetaB4" <BetaB$@betab4dfgh.lkj>
wrote:

Can't explain the codes but you can compute the retro amt. for SSDI
cases if you know the established onset date (EOD) and the date of
application.

The first month of entitlement (MOE) is the 6th month after EOD but
never more than 12 months prior to application month. Once you know
MOE, simply count the no. of months from MOE until the month that
regular monthly payments began. Multiply the no. of months by the
monthly benefit rate(s).

If it's not SSDI but rather title II disabled adult childhood
benefits, the same idea applies but begin with his first MOE which
will be month of parent's death, month of parent's SSDI MOE, or month
of parent's entitlement to retirement benefits, whichever the case may
be.

Jack

unread,
Aug 18, 2009, 1:06:26 PM8/18/09
to

Incidentally, retro amts. than $4000 or more are normally paid in
installments to rep payees, except for these:

(...)

3. Accumulation of $4000 or More
If the amount of accumulation is $4,000 or more, assess the payee's
ability to handle such an accumulation UNLESS the payee is:

the beneficiary's close relative who has custody of the beneficiary
(see GN 00603.070B.3.);

the beneficiary's legal guardian; or

a bank or trust company.

Social agency or a public or nonprofit institution or organization
whose principal activities include direct care and maintenance or
treatment of children or incapable adults.

(...)


https://secure.ssa.gov/apps10/poms.nsf/lnx/0200502186!opendocument


BetaB4

unread,
Aug 18, 2009, 1:19:53 PM8/18/09
to

Thank you so much for your help!

I think it will turn out to be the "title II disabled adult childhood
benefits" that you mentioned. This young man was in out-of-home
state-funded placements for much of his life due his mother also being
disabled and unable to care for him. And, the "month of parent's SSDI MOE"
was many years ago when this young man was a child.

Our nonprofit is a "Social agency or a public or nonprofit institution or

organization whose principal activities include direct care and maintenance

or treatment of children or incapable adults", so I guess that's why they
released the whole amount.

We'll go to the SSA to find out for sure, but I'll bet that's what it will
turn out to be.


don

unread,
Aug 24, 2009, 6:26:46 AM8/24/09
to

"Jack" <Wind...@home.home> wrote in message
news:4a8adb40...@nntp.aioe.org...

> If it's not SSDI but rather title II disabled adult childhood
> benefits, the same idea applies but begin with his first MOE which
> will be month of parent's death, month of parent's SSDI MOE, or month
> of parent's entitlement to retirement benefits, whichever the case may
> be.

Jack - I have never heard of this title ll disabled adult childhood benefit
until your post. My history is this:
I was disabled at age 11, went to college, had a job for 15 years, but
eventually had to go on SSDI because my condition got worse. My question is:
am I entitled to some sort of retroactive SSDI payment under this title ll
adult childhood benefit as this other person seems to have just received.

Thanks for your opinion.


Jack

unread,
Aug 24, 2009, 9:01:58 AM8/24/09
to

For an adult child to receive title II childhood disability benefits,
your disability must have begun before age 22. You apparently worked
above the SGA levels until at least your late 30s. Even if your
condition satisfied the medical requirements prior to 22, your work
activity would provide prima facie evidence that you did not meet the
disability requirement before 22. Look at your onset date (the date
you first became unable to work) on your SSDI letter. It should be
after 22.
_______


http://ftp.ssa.gov/OP_Home/cfr20/404/404-0350.htm

Child's Benefits
�404.350 Who is entitled to child's benefits

(...)

(...) you are 18 years old or older and have a disability that began
before you became 22 years old (...)

(...)
______

http://ftp.ssa.gov/OP_Home/cfr20/404/404-1505.htm

�404.1505 Basic definition of disability.

(a) The law defines disability as the inability to do any substantial
gainful activity (...)
_____

http://ftp.ssa.gov/OP_Home/cfr20/404/404-1520.htm

�404.1520 Evaluation of disability in general.

(...)

(4) The five-step sequential evaluation process. The sequential
evaluation process is a series of five "steps" that we follow in a set
order.(...)

(...)

(i) At the first step, we consider your work activity, if any. If you
are doing substantial gainful activity, we will find that you are not
disabled.(...)

(...)

0 new messages