Complaint Review: Patrick Earl Hartley - Phoenix Arizona

I was unable to hold Mr. Hartley accountable for defrauding my son out of $5,000 of his back pay.  Mr. Hartley called my son and his threats upset him to such a degree that it became in my son's best interest to stop all interactions with Mr, Hartley to avoid any further emotional upset.

Getting your Disability Hearing Case scheduled is somethimes a multiyear event.  Not showing up the morning of a hearing scheduled months in advance in an effort to delay the hearing and thus increase the amount of legal fees you receive is Not representing your clients best interest.

I hope this helps someone else avoid the same failed repersentation.  Avoid trusting Patrick Hartley at all cost..

 He claims he realized a scheduling conflict the day before the hearing due to his own error. He also said two hearings were scheduled at two different offices. (1) Hearings are scheduled months in advance, yet he didn’t realize his error until the day before the hearing. That shows a lack of attention to detail. (2) when hearings are scheduled you know who the Judge is, and they are always at the same offices, so apparently he has no clue which judges are in which offices, a sign of his lack of familiarity of the judges in the area, or he made up this story, or he is incompetent, because he cannot manage basic scheduling. If he was an attorney and not a non-attorney representative, he would be subject to state bar rules. The State bar would discipline any attorney that missed court for this reason.

The most outrageous part of this situation is that, knowing that he provided no services whatsoever, was a no-show at the hearing and had been caught lying about the reason for his absence at the hearing (which led the original ALJ to deny his fee) Mr. Hartley managed to get paid $5,013.87. Remember. Mr Patrick Hartley is NOT a licensed attorney and therefore cannot be brought before the Legal Disciplinary Board. Furthermore, Mr. Hartley is lying (again) He claims he had a "scheduling conflict" that kept him from showing up at the hearing to represent my son, however, the ALJ (social security hearing judge) sent a runner over to the Social Security Office location where Mr. Hartley claimed to be and Mr. Hartley could not be located in the building and did not appear to be scheduled for any hearings. This is why the original hearing judge disallowed Mr. Hartley's fees to begin with.

I believe Mr. Hartley attempted to delay my son's hearing in order to increase the amount of back-pay and thus increase his fee amount. I have since discovered that this is a popular tactic used by unscrupulous disability attorneys' /non-attorney representatives to effectively steal money from the disabled clients they have sworn to represent. It also delays their disabled clients the medical treatment and monthly benefits that they need to survive. I am so grateful for Ripoff Reports. Mr. Hartley seems to be experiencing some well deserved negative repercussions for his actions. He has a path to repair his reputation, that of returning the ill gotten gains and correcting his business practices. I would be just as verbal about Mr. Hartley's ability to admit and correct his mistakes as I have been about my poor experience with him. He would be wise to do just that. There are many reputable and effective disability attorneys/non-attorney representatives, unfortunately Mr. Hartley is not one of them.

The most outrageous part of this situation is that, knowing that he provided no services whatsoever, was a no-show at the hearing and had been caught lying about the reason for his absence at the hearing (which led the original ALJ to deny his fee) Mr. Hartley managed to get paid $5,013.87. Remember. Mr Patrick Hartley is NOT a licensed attorney and therefore cannot be brought before the Legal Disciplinary Board. Furthermore, Mr. Hartley is lying (again) He claims he had a "scheduling conflict" that kept him from showing up at the hearing to represent my son, however, the ALJ (social security hearing judge) sent a runner over to the Social Security Office location where Mr. Hartley claimed to be and Mr. Hartley could not be located in the building and did not appear to be scheduled for any hearings. This is why the original hearing judge disallowed Mr. Hartley's fees to begin with. I believe Mr. Hartley attempted to delay my son's hearing in order to increase the amount of back-pay and thus increase his fee amount. I have since discovered that this is a popular tactic used by unscrupulous disability attorneys' /non-attorney representatives to effectively steal money from the disabled clients they have sworn to represent. It also delays their disabled clients the medical treatment and monthly benefits that they need to survive. I am so grateful for Ripoff Reports. Mr. Hartley seems to be experiencing some well deserved negative repercussions for his actions. He has a path to repair his reputation, that of returning the ill gotten gains and correcting his business practices. I would be just as verbal about Mr. Hartley's ability to admit and correct his mistakes as I have been about my poor experience with him. He would be wise to do just that. There are many reputable and effective disability attorneys/non-attorney representatives, unfortunately Mr. Hartley is not one of them.

 There truly are two sides to every story. I have not responded to this complaint for over 3 years and neglecting to do so has resulted in confusion and questioning my reputation as a Social Security Disability Representative. First of all let me say that I have been involved in the Adjudication process of Social Security Disability claims either as a Vocational Expert to the Office of Hearing Operations or as a Representative of Claimants since 1990. I currently have an A+ rating with the Better Business Bureau. As one might expect, being in business that long, while I have had some complaints over the years, none have been as graphic, public, or potentially damaging as this one. Let me explain that many Representatives do not meet with their clients until the day of the hearing. That's because it is not necessary; all the pre-hearing work can be done by phone, fax, email, etc. I had prepared this person's son for the hearing in a lengthy telephone call where I went over all the questions that would be asked in the hearing, and I answered any questions he (or his Mother) might have had about the hearing process. I had reviewed all the medical records in the Social Security file and had supplemented them with updated medical reports prior to the hearing. There are two OHOs in the Phoenix area.

The afternoon before the hearing I realized that there was a conflict. I had hearings scheduled in both offices at nearly the same time. I had marked on my calendar that both hearings were in the same office, one after the other. When I realized my error, I placed a call to the Judge's office to indicate I had a conflict and I asked for a Continuance of his hearing. I faxed a written copy of my request. I could only be in one office, so one would need to be continued. On the day of the hearing, the Judge decided I had no just cause for the continuance, granted the case, and denied my fee. I appealed this to the Chief Judge's office in San Francisco, pleaded my case with the rationale above, and I was awarded a fee. I regret this woman's disappointment but SSA affirmed that the Judge had erred in how she handled this matter. Unfortunately, this format does not accept any stories of satisfied Clients but you can read about them on my website which is SOUTHWESTDISABILITYADVOCATES.COM.