by Gene Doyle, LMSW

In a May 1, 1991 memorandum to ALJs, Acting Deputy Counsel for Fair Hearings, Russell J. Hanks, set forth the Office of Administrative Hearings (OAH) policy with respect to social services districts' failures to comply with 18 NYCRR Part 358. Under the heading, "Other Concerns" (at p. 3), Mr. Hanks stated that:

"Where an aid-continuing issue arises, the hearing officer has the authority to direct the social services district to continue, discontinue or restore aid when appropriate."

In a June 23, 1992 letter, clarifying OAH policy with respect to appellants' allegations of non-receipt of notices, Mr. Hanks stated:

"with regard to allegations of non-receipt of a notice by an appellant at the time of a fair hearing request . . . the appropriate response is to make the case aid-continuing until the issue of non-receipt is dealt with at the hearing."

This policy clarification is reflected in OAH's online frequently asked questions (FAQs):

Will I continue to receive my benefits while I’m waiting for my hearing?

See also Auguste v Wing, CV-96-1153 (E.D.N.Y. November 18, 1996), reported at 1996 WL 684428 *3, 1996 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 20118 *7, in which Chief Judge Charles P. Sifton explained that

     A request for aid-continuing is "timely" when (1) the request is made prior to the effective date of a timely and adequate notice or (2) the request is made within ten days of the day on which a contemporaneous notice is mailed. 18 N.Y.C.R.R. § 358-3.6(a). Factual disputes regarding the timeliness or receipt of notice are to be resolved at the fair hearing, and aid-continuing should be granted until a determination is made. Matter of York v Sabol, No. 25677/91 (Sup. Ct. Queens Co. 1992).

Please read the Disclaimer.

Article ID: 17
Last updated: 25 Jan, 2016
Revision: 5
Office of Admininstrative Hearings -> Fair Hearing Policies and Interpretations -> Aid-Continuing