Nod Ignored

[broncovet]

I filed a Notice of Disagreement on March 10, 2004. So far, it has been ignored. What can I do about

this? I complained to them and the RO said my NOD was "interpreted as a claim for benefits". However, that statement conflicts with the evidence:

1) ON my NOD which was recieved by the Regional Office, it has "appeals" circled on it by a VA employee (although I cant make out the Employees intitials)

2. I have never received any benefits (nor denied any benefits) with an effective date of March 10, 2004.

Any Advice? Can they just ignore my NOD or misinterpret it and get away with that?

Thanks

[RetiredVet]

It would be interesting to hear a little more background on this one ie......what you claimed, their denial, your response etc......

Also

Why did you get mad and file a writ? Was it because you got your cfile and saw this NOD or have you actively been pursuing the issue along the way? Just curious.

In response to your writ the Sec stated that the paper had been interperted as a claim for benefits. That is strange for they do not have such luxury. The court has ruled that even the most twisted response from a veteran (in an appeal) must be clarified.

As they did respond to the writ and say they "interperted" the document to be a claim for benefits then how did they explain that none had been awarded or denied based upon the document your submitted?

Yes this is going to take a one on one with your rep's involvement to unsnooker my friend.

It is in 38 CFR. The VA never seems to follow laws, regulations or anythign else. The VA creates the backlog.

http://edocket.access.gpo.gov/cfr_2008/jul.../38cfr19.28.pdf

[RetiredVet]

It would be interesting to hear a little more background on this one ie......what you claimed, their denial, your response etc......

Also

Why did you get mad and file a writ? Was it because you got your cfile and saw this NOD or have you actively been pursuing the issue along the way? Just curious.

In response to your writ the Sec stated that the paper had been interperted as a claim for benefits. That is strange for they do not have such luxury. The court has ruled that even the most twisted response from a veteran (in an appeal) must be clarified.

As they did respond to the writ and say they "interperted" the document to be a claim for benefits then how did they explain that none had been awarded or denied based upon the document your submitted?

Yes this is going to take a one on one with your rep's involvement to unsnooker my friend.

Also this one is where that part starts. No wonder we need lawyers. But now we can use lawyers and teams of lawyers if we can get them.

http://edocket.access.gpo.gov/cfr_2006/jul...f/38cfr20.1.pdf

§ 19.26 Action by agency of original jurisdiction

on Notice of Disagreement.

When a Notice of Disagreement is

timely filed, the agency of original jurisdiction

must reexamine the claim

and determine if additional review or

development is warranted. When a Notice

of Disagreement is received following

a multiple-issue determination

and it is not clear which issue, or

issues, the claimant desires to appeal,

clarification sufficient to identify the

issue, or issues, being appealed should

be requested from the claimant or his

or her representative. If no preliminary

action is required, or when it is completed,

the agency of original jurisdiction

must prepare a Statement of the

Case pursuant to § 19.29 of this part, unless

the matter is resolved by granting

the benefits sought on appeal or the

Notice of Disagreement is withdrawn

by the appellant or his or her representative.

(Authority: 38 U.S.C. 7105(d)(1)

http://edocket.access.gpo.gov/cfr_2003/jul.../38cfr19.26.pdf

[Wings]

Concerning NOD's.

http://www.access.gpo.gov/nara/cfr/waisidx...38cfr19_00.html

No way we could know all of this. I get mixed up on what day or time it is.

x

x

x

Thanks for posting this link, I really needed the information! ~Wings