Is there a way to keep, giveaway, etc. my accident settlement and not lose my SSI?

[cskim2434]

What is the name of your state (only U.S. law)? California
My mother was a passenger in my car, when I was rear ended/hit and run. I caught the driver and I am suing her. But my mother is on SSI and gets other help from Government for being poor. She was also slightly injured and would like to be in my lawsuit. But she can't afford to lose her Government benefits, especially her medical. She doesn't care if she gets to keep, give me the money, or be able to get rid of her old car and buy a newer one, with the settlement.

My Aunt, the other passenger, receives SSA only. So I think she's okay. Please correct me if I'm wrong.

I am sure it would only be few thousand dollars per person; there was total of 3 in the car, including me. All of us don't care if the whole settlement comes in my name. The most important thing is that my mother and my aunt does not lose their benefits. I saw that if she spends it right away, like giving it to me, it's okay... if she trades up her car, it's okay... If she start a Trust Account, it's okay... But it's only few thousand dollars. After attorney's fee, there would be nothing. Everyone just says talk to an attorney. it's just few thousand dollars. So after the consultation fee, there will be nothing left. I am sure someone out there had experience like this. I can't be the only one. There's a car accident every few minutes in California. I am sure some of the injured are on SSI.

I wrote as clearly as possible. Would someone give me a straight answer? As I said, we don't care how it's done. We are looking for any solution, besides not suing.

Thank you.

 

[Zigner]

Should not one who is receiving needs-based assistance from the government be required to reimburse the government when they receive a windfall?

 

[LdiJ]

Should not one who is receiving needs-based assistance from the government be required to reimburse the government when they receive a windfall?

Absolutely they should. I do have an overall problem with it however because when the "windfall" is a very small one...just a few thousand, it is a fairly complicated process to get the SSI restarted once the windfall is used up. I really think that there should be a level at which a windfall does not have to be reported. Maybe 10k? Maybe 5k? When one is truly disabled and needs their benefits to continue seamlessly in order to survive, its sad that they have to forego a small inheritance or settlement because its too large of a risk.

 

[Zigner]

Absolutely they should. I do have an overall problem with it however because when the "windfall" is a very small one...just a few thousand, it is a fairly complicated process to get the SSI restarted once the windfall is used up. I really think that there should be a level at which a windfall does not have to be reported. Maybe 10k? Maybe 5k? When one is truly disabled and needs their benefits to continue seamlessly in order to survive, its sad that they have to forego a small inheritance or settlement because its too large of a risk.

I can agree with this.

ETA: For something small, I would think they could set up a program whereby the "windfall" is subtracted from future payments seamlessly.

 

[LdiJ]

I can agree with this.

ETA: For something small, I would think they could set up a program whereby the "windfall" is subtracted from future payments seamlessly.

That is another possible option, however I do not think it exists at this time. I just would like to see something done that would allow truly disabled people to be able to receive a little bit of a windfall without having to put their SSI at risk. I do know that they are allowed to have a certain amount of liquid assets, but I believe that its VERY small and perhaps has not been indexed for inflation.

 

[BL]

An SSI recipient can ask for a waiver ( they fill out a waiver form and submit it ) and see if it's approved.

If the amount is small and the recipient checks it would cause a hardship to repay , the waiver possibly would be approved .

 

[Onderzoek]

What is the name of your state (only U.S. law)? California
My mother was a passenger in my car, when I was rear ended/hit and run. I caught the driver and I am suing her. But my mother is on SSI and gets other help from Government for being poor. She was also slightly injured and would like to be in my lawsuit. But she can't afford to lose her Government benefits, especially her medical. She doesn't care if she gets to keep, give me the money, or be able to get rid of her old car and buy a newer one, with the settlement.

My Aunt, the other passenger, receives SSA only. So I think she's okay. Please correct me if I'm wrong.

I am sure it would only be few thousand dollars per person; there was total of 3 in the car, including me. All of us don't care if the whole settlement comes in my name. The most important thing is that my mother and my aunt does not lose their benefits. I saw that if she spends it right away, like giving it to me, it's okay... if she trades up her car, it's okay... If she start a Trust Account, it's okay... But it's only few thousand dollars. After attorney's fee, there would be nothing. Everyone just says talk to an attorney. it's just few thousand dollars. So after the consultation fee, there will be nothing left. I am sure someone out there had experience like this. I can't be the only one. There's a car accident every few minutes in California. I am sure some of the injured are on SSI.

I wrote as clearly as possible. Would someone give me a straight answer? As I said, we don't care how it's done. We are looking for any solution, besides not suing.

Thank you.

Straight answer:

No way. The insurance settlement will be considered income in the month of receipt. The overpayment resulting from the receipt should not be waived because she would have the ability to repay the SSI for that month from the settlement. I am guessing she gets $877.40 so that can be repaid right away.

The first day of the following month (one day or 30 days later) whatever is left from the settlement will be counted toward the $2000 resource limit.

There are things she can buy that are excluded from the $2000 resource limit. One car is excluded. Burial space items are excluded. Separately identifiable burial funds are excluded up to $1500 (after she agrees not to spend it on anything else) and does not have life insurance. Normal household goods are excluded. A trust account that she establishes with her own money is not excluded.

If she gives money away, she can be penalized with non-payment for one to 36 months, if she can't establish that she gave it away exclusively for a purpose other than SSI eligibility. And since that is what she wants to do, I am sure she can't prove that she gave it away for any other reason.

It is not that hard to get SSI started up again if it is stopped for excess resources. Usually best to do it in person with all documents that establish how much was received, how it was spent and when she went under the $2000 resource limit. As long as she establishes that she is under the resource limit in the 11th month after receipt, a new application will not be necessary for reinstatement. There are more problems with the SSI staff when recipients try to hide these sorts of things and then can't prove anything when asked. Then the employees stop believing what they say.

And if the IRS can find it, SSI will also eventually find out as well.

Medi-Cal may stop when the SSI stops, although it is often continued for one month after SSI stops. It can be reinstated when the SSI starts up again, although it may take a month to do so.

It is true that people who have relied on the government to supply their income for food and shelter and subsidized health insurance and subsidized housing don't get ahead when they receive a windfall. People who provide for their own food and shelter by going to work do get ahead when they get a windfall. Sounds unfair to the person on SSI, but the person who goes to work every day and pays the taxes to support the SSI recipient would like to keep more of their money by paying fewer taxes as well.

 

[cskim2434]

Can she trade in her 10 year car for another one?

It was my mother's car that was rear ended. It's over 10 years old. Can she use her settlement to change car? Since having one car of any value is legal? She can do this within a day of receiving hersettlement. Any thoughts?

 

[LdiJ]

It was my mother's car that was rear ended. It's over 10 years old. Can she use her settlement to change car? Since having one car of any value is legal? She can do this within a day of receiving hersettlement. Any thoughts?

That should be ok. However, I would confirm that with the Social Security Administration.

 

[cskim2434]

Thanks

If she could do that, she'd be ecstatic and I wouldn't have to keep fixing her car.

 

[tranquility]

http://www.pi-yimayo.com/papers/how%20does%20my%20settlement.pdf

It is income and will reduce benefits for the month received. It can be either a countable resource or not longer term, depending on what is done with it.

 

[cskim2434]

Huh?

She definitely needs to change cars. I just would like to know if she trades her car within the same month she gets the settlement, would that be ok? Of course I will go to Social Security office asap. I just want some options, before we go. Thanks.

 

[tranquility]

She definitely needs to change cars. I just would like to know if she trades her car within the same month she gets the settlement, would that be ok? Of course I will go to Social Security office asap. I just want some options, before we go. Thanks.

The link I provided specifically answers your question. It is income and the monthly amount will be reduced. If it is spent or invested on something that is not countable, it will not be a counted resource in the next month.

 

[single317dad]

She definitely needs to change cars. I just would like to know if she trades her car within the same month she gets the settlement, would that be ok? Of course I will go to Social Security office asap. I just want some options, before we go. Thanks.

Posts 7, 11, and 13 gave the same, correct answer.

 

[Onderzoek]

My answer is correct based on your original presentation of the events. This was your car, according to post #1.

"My mother was a passenger in my car",

Then you later said it was your mother's car.

"It was my mother's car that was rear ended."

Both statements cannot be true. You can't get a straight answer when you don't give a straight story.

The following link might apply depending upon what statement you made is true, but at this point, I don't know and if your definition of settlement includes anything other than replacing her damaged car, then this link is not on point.

https://secure.ssa.gov/apps10/poms.nsf/lnx/0501130630

She will owe SSI money if she gets a 'settlement'. Period.

Now I am done commenting on this ever changing story.