R resided in a nursing home where she received long-term care. Her son, P, was appointed as her representative payee for her social security benefits. He used her monthly benefits to pay monthly mortgage payments on her home, to which there was no expectation that she would return to live. He also used the funds to pay for a loan she had previously contracted.

Understandably, the County Welfare Department complained, asserting that priority should be given to maintaining the current cost of her maintenance.

The social security agency agreed. The maintenance of R’s property rights and loan creditor should not have been prioritized over her current needs, particularly where she had no expectation of ever returning to live in the home. The Welfare Department was shouldering more than its share of the burden of maintaining and caring for R, and her social security income was being improperly diverted to less immediate priorities.

See Social Security Ruling (SSR) 68-18.

This material should not be construed as legal advice for any particular fact situation, but is intended for general informational purposes only. For advice specific to any individual situation, an experienced attorney should be contacted.