Example 1- Allegation acceptable
During her redetermination, Ms. Barrett submitted bank records showing resources over
the $2,000 limit for 03/10 and 04/10 followed by a $750 withdrawal in 05/10 that brought
her total resources below the limit. Ms. Barrett provides a statement that she used
$150 for utility bills, $170 for a dentist bill, $300 for car repairs, and $130 for
plumbing repairs. Assuming there is no conflicting information in the file, there
is no need to request receipts to verify these allegations.
Example 2 - Allegation questionable
Mr. Jones filed for SSI on 06/05/09 and he alleged liquid resources of $1,800 on 06/01/09.
Mr. Jones alleged that he spent about $3,000 from savings in 05/09 just prior to filing
for SSI. He said that he spent $2000 for a new furnace and spent the rest on a series
of small purchases. Prior to spending this money, Mr. Jones was over the SSI resource
limit. At the time of the interview, Mr. Jones could not explain how and when he spent
the additional $1,000. Since he could not provide a reasonable accounting of how he
spent the funds, his allegation is questionable. The CR requests additional evidence
to support Mr. Jones' allegation of spend-down before making a determination.
Example 3 - Abbreviated development in AFI based determination
Ms. Fox filed for SSI on 10/01/11 and alleged the only resource she had was a checking
account with a balance of $1400. The financial account information received via eAFI
revealed that she had $6,000 in that account 7 months prior to her application and
her monthly bank balances show a steady decline. The CR considers the information
on the application, which shows a mortgage of $1000 a month, the spouse reports no
income, and two minor children in the household who have no income. Based on these
factors derived from the application and the financial account information, the CR
determines that Ms. Fox spent the money to pay the family’s monthly bills. The CR
has no cause to question the spend-down and curtails any development. The CR documents
his decision on a DROC. Ms Fox received FMV for her cash spend-down, and therefore,
no transfer of resource penalty exists.