Page 67

Page 2 of 2 § 10:70-5.3 SSI-related cases Though other family members testified to their sincerely-held belief that the applicant did not own such an interest in the transferred property, such testimony was insufficient to overcome documentary evidence demonstrating otherwise. Moreover, even if the property had been placed in trust for the applicant, that would not change the result because the applicant had already transferred her interest for less than market value. L.S. v. Somerset Cnty. Bd. of Social Servs., OAL DKT. NO. HMA 15032-14, 2016 N.J. AGEN LEXIS 535, Initial Decision (June 27, 2016). Determination by a county board of social services (CBSS) that a 42-day transfer penalty was properly imposed on the eligibility of an applicant for Medicaid was incorrect because the preponderance of the credible evidence showed that the applicant's daughter, who was generally responsible for her care, made some of the challenged transfers for a reason other than to qualify for Medicaid eligibility. Because the daughter convincingly rebutted the presumption that the transfers were made to establish Medicaid eligibility, the transfers on which a penalty was properly imposed totaled $ 12,437.33. B.J.H. v. Union Cty. Bd. of Social Servs., OAL DKT. NO. HMA 13823-14, 2015 N.J. AGEN LEXIS 208, Initial Decision (February 13, 2015). Parents of two profoundly disabled children won a waiver from a duty to repay Medicaid benefits paid on behalf of those two children, which reimbursement was sought because the father failed to report his ownership of a 401(k) plan. While the 401(k) plan account was not reported on certain forms, it was reflected on paystubs regularly submitted by the father to the county. It also was significant that the funds at issue were used to retrofit the family home with an elevator lift to accommodate one child's wheelchair, to modify the bathroom to improve access for the children, and to pay medical and other bills. The Commissioner of the Department of Human Services acted properly in waiving repayment on these facts. M.B. et al v. DMAHS et al., OAL DKT. NO. HMA 15436-14, 2015 N.J. AGEN LEXIS 428, Initial Decision (June 29, 2015). Expert testimony demonstrated that an annuity could be converted to cash and thus was an available resource for purposes of a nursing facility resident's application for Medicaid benefits under the Medically Needy program; the annuity, purchased by the applicant, a widow, for $ 195,710, was to pay the applicant $ 1,740.85 per month for 10 years and stated on its face that it was non-assignable (adopting 2007 N.J. AGEN LEXIS 209). D.M. v. DMAHS, OAL Dkt. No. HMA 6394-06, 2007 N.J. AGEN LEXIS 546, Final Decision (June 11, 2007). Initial Decision (2007 N.J. AGEN LEXIS 209) adopted, which concluded that an application for Medicaid benefits under the Medically Needy program was correctly denied for the applicant's failure to provide requested information regarding three attempts to sell the subject annuity, which the applicant claimed was an unavailable resource; while the Division may ultimately bear the burden of proving that a market exists, and that this particular annuity could be sold, this did not relieve the applicant of her obligation to produce information the Division requested. D.M. v. DMAHS, OAL Dkt. No. HMA 6394-06, 2007 N.J. AGEN LEXIS 546, Final Decision (June 11, 2007). NEW JERSEY ADMINISTRATIVE CODE Copyright © 2025 by the New Jersey Office of Administrative Law End of Document