Page 120

Page 13 of 18 § 10:71-4.1 Financial eligibility standards; resources 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). ALJ rejected the determination of an agency imposing a penalty on the Medicaid eligibility of a widow based on her having had a conditional life estate in residential real estate owned by her deceased husband. The life estate granted by the deceased husband's will was not a "resource" within the meaning of governing regulations because it was subject to terminable conditions in the late husband's will over which the widow had no control. Since it was neither real nor personal property owned by the widow which could be converted to cash to be used for her support and maintenance, any monetary value that the life estate might have had was not properly included in a penalty on the widow's Medicaid eligibility. M.M. v. DMAHS et al., OAL DKT. NO. HMA 2915-15, 2015 N.J. AGEN LEXIS 459, Initial Decision (June 26, 2015). Determination by the Division of Medical Assistance and Services (DMAHS) and a county Board of Social Services denying an application for Medicaid filed on behalf of an elderly women who had dementia and resided in a nursing home based on her joint ownership, with an adult son who was permanently disabled, of stock valued at $ 89,309.28 was unsupported by the evidence and properly rejected. The son, a permanently incapacitated adult who permanently resided in a VA hospital, was totally blind, had no recollection of his mother being alive, and refused to sign any documents relating to the stock. Given the son's condition, it could not be said that the assets at issue were accessible to the mother because she had no power to liquidate them without her son's approval, and thus the stocks could not be included as countable resources of the applicant according to governing regulations. To the extent that the determination of ineligibility relied on the existence of the stocks, it was incorrect, and the applicant was entitled to an order granting her application for Medicaid. F.F. v. DMAHS and Union Cty. Bd. of Social Servs., OAL DKT. NO. HMA 00793-15, 2015 N.J. AGEN LEXIS 318, Initial Decision (June 3, 2015). County Board of Social Services (CBSS) correctly set an applicant's Medicaid-eligibility date as March 1, 2015. At the time applicant's brother filed his Medicaid application seeking Medical Long Term Services and Support, the applicant's resources, which included Social Security benefits and a very small pension, exceeded the eligibility standards. Thereafter, however, applicant established a Qualified Income Trust (QIT) for the de minimus amounts which put applicant over the resource threshold, and eligibility as of March 1 was established. Applicant's claim for an earlier eligibility date lacked basis because the CBSS was neither authorized nor obligated to provide legal advice to applicant as to the availability of a QIT. Moreover, the use of a QIT was not even approved until December 2014. That meant that the March 1, 2015 date was proper. R.K. v. Burlington Cty. Bd. of Social Servs., OAL DKT. NO. HMA 04457-15, 2015 N.J. AGEN LEXIS 301, Initial Decision (May 21, 2015). Applicant for Nursing Home Medicaid (NHM) was improperly denied eligibility on the ground that her resources of $ 6,725.44 from several bank accounts exceeded the $ 2,000 Medicaid eligibility limit. Specifically, an investment account holding $ 5,658.88 should not have been counted as a resource of the applicant notwithstanding that her name was listed as a joint tenant thereon because the applicant's daughter, who was the source of all deposits into that account, credibly testified that she had added her mother's name to the account at a time when she was residing with her mother; and that her mother was currently an "incapacitated" person and the daughter had been appointed as her mother's temporary guardian. The daughter's testimony was forthright, sincere and uncontroverted. Given that fact and given the further fact that the mother's incapacity foreclosed her from independently accessing the investment account, the funds held therein should not have been counted as the mother's resources for purposes of NHM eligibility. F.J. v. Camden Cty. Bd. of Social Servs., OAL DKT. NO. HMA 15125-14, 2015 N.J. AGEN LEXIS 261, Initial Decision (April 30, 2015). Decision of a county Board of Social Services (CBSS) imposing a $ 127,751.71 transfer penalty due to uncompensated transfers within the look-back period upon the Medicaid eligibility of a 91 year old woman was modified in part based on evidence relative to the use of a substantial portion of those funds for the applicant's care. The undisputed evidence established that $ 60,000 was returned to the applicant and $ 53,360.92 was used exclusively for her care. That meant that the transfer penalty was properly reduced by the amount shown to have