broncovet

Berta... I hope this works well for you. However, remember that VACO is where Christine Alford (former manager at Cleveland RO) was promoted to, shortly after the shredding scandal erupted and Cleveland RO was found to be one of the top 5 worst in the country at shredding claims, according to the VA oig report. Of course, this indicates, when someone gets caught with their hand in the cookie jar, then gets promoted instead of jailed, that the corruption is not just at the RO level, but is widespread at VACO also. Somebody had to cover up Christine Alford's mistakes else she would not have gotten promoted, and that SOMEBODY could not be at the RO level..it had to be at the VAOIG level or VACO level where her mistakes were covered up. I am not too sure you will fare much better at VACO than you did at the RO level, except now they can blame Dunne who was fired, and the VACO can point to Dunne and say, "We fixed that problem".

Congratulations If you agree with the effective date, dont do anything. However, if You applied before your effective date you can still appeal and get more retro.

Detroit Regional Office was the worst RO in the country for shredded claims, as the VAOIG found over 10,000 claims that were lost or awaiting to be shredded in just one day. Good luck in them having all your information. If you havent looked at your C file lately, you should check and see what stuff has already been shredded unless you happened to be one of the lucky few who did not have anything shredded in Detroit. The odds are against you.

No offense intended, but I think if the VA/Congress REALLY wanted to speed this up, it would have already happened. Has anyone but me noticed the backlog for VA executive compensation is Zero? There are NO VA executives complaining, "WHY is it taking so long for the VA to process my Executive Bonus application?" Instead, VA executives get their bonuses in days, or even hours, while making Veterans wait years for their just compensation. Maybe they ought to "switch". In other words those efficient employees that now get the VA executive bonuses out promptly should work on Veterans claims, and the ones who are taking 5 years to process Veterans applications should be put in charge of VA executive compensation.

Rob.. Waiting to file your claim costs you money. For each month you wait, if you are 100%, that costs you about $2700. How many $2700 can you afford to loose?

Pete.. Though I agree with you, the reason they dont stop fruad in the government, is because that would stop campaign contributions.

I am not a hadit big wig, I am the designated hadit foul up, trying to work my way up to flunkee-apprentice. If I do well at flunkee-apprentice, I can apply to be dirt. Several steps below dirt, according to the VA, is the Veteran. I dont have the authority to change my mind, unless my mind needs changing, which is 100% of the time. I think if you get awarded benefits, the effective date will be the later of when you applied, or when the facts show you were disabled. Just because you applied in 94..it could be that YOUR DOCTOR said you were disabled in 2009, and your effective date would be 09. That is, just because you applied in 94, does not guarntee that, if awarded benefits, the effective date will be 1994. My experience is that the VA Always tries to maniputlate those dates in their favor. They are going to go over a 15 year retro with a fine tooth comb. If you do get benefits, expect that the VA will make you fight for your effective date, in the same way they made you fight for your benefits. The VA loves to take a 2 step process and turn it into 45 steps, then, when you finish the 45 steps, tell you that you have to start all over again with your effective date.

Post deleted by author

Bob Smith Precisely. "Benefit of the doubt" and CUE rules are in conflict with one another. If you read the following opinion by two VA lawyers, offered at http://www.vawatchdog.org/09/nf09/nfnov09/nf110909-3.htm you will agree that the Supreme court has ruled ALL reasonable doubt be resolved in favor of the claimant, and makes NO exceptions for when the Veteran appeals beyond the one year period (CUE). The Supreme Court observed that claimants had numerous rights while pursuing a claim, including the right to a hearing, 30 ex parte proceedings, with no opposition by a government official,31 assistance 25 38 U.S.C. § 211(a) (1982); see also Walters, 473 U.S. at 307 (the Court, citing to Johnson v. Robison, 415 U.S. 361 (1974), acknowledged that an exception to the general preclusion of judicial review was a constitutional challenge). 26 Nat’l Ass’n of Radiation Survivors, 589 F. Supp. at 1305. 27 38 U.S.C. § 3405 (1982). 28 See, e.g., Walters, 473 U.S. at 309; see also The Avalon Project at Yale Law School, http://www.yale.edu/lawweb/avalon/presiden...ug/lincoln2.htm (last visited Sept. 1, 2008). 29 Walters, 473 U.S. at 309. 30 38 C.F.R. § 3.103© (1984). 31 Id. § 3.103(a). 8 by the rating board in developing facts pertinent to the claim,32 and consideration of all evidence offered by the claimant.33 Further, the Supreme Court pointed out that all reasonable doubts had to be resolved in favor of the claimant.34 Finally, the Supreme Court observed that BVA hearings were subject to the same rules as local agency hearings and were likewise ex parte, with no formal questioning or cross examination, and no formal rules of evidence applying.35

I am including the regulations requiring the VA consider all evidence, to cite, if necessary to win your claim. This would apply to "shredded evidence", because, if evidence were shredded, then the VA would not consider it. This is from Nova vs VA Secretary decided May, 2003 We conclude that § 3.304(f) does not conflict with 38 U.S.C. § 5107( . Section 5107( ;) , entitled "Claimant responsibility; benefit of the doubt," provides: ( :o Benefit of the Doubt.—The Secretary shall consider all information and lay and medical evidence of record in a case before the Secretary with respect to benefits under laws administered by the Secretary. When there is an approximate balance of positive and negative evidence regarding any issue material to the determination of a matter, the Secretary shall give the benefit of the doubt to the claimant. 38 U.S.C. § 5107( :P (emphasis added). Section 5107( :D provides that the VA must consider all information and lay and medical evidence of record in adjudicating a claim for veterans benefits and that "[w]hen there is an approximate balance of positive and negative evidence regarding any issue material to the determination of a matter, the Secretary shall give the benefit of the doubt to the claimant." Id.; see 38 C.F.R. § 3.102 (2002) ("The reasonable doubt doctrine is also applicable even in the absence of official records, particularly if the basic incident allegedly arose under combat, or similarly strenuous conditions . . . .").

Mrs. Vet, I do recommend you do something to ease your mind. If that something is preparing another appeal while you are in remand, and that makes you feel better and better prepared, far be it from me to tell you differently. I doubt that you will be upset if you win..that you did all this work to appeal needlessly. However, if you loose, then you will have the appeal ready to go, except the parts that are specific to the newest decision.

I agree with Hoppy..he has been around helping Vets for a long time. I think the biggest "relaxation" of rules for Vets was the VCAA. If I understand it, prior to the VCAA in about year 2000, Vets had to prove their claim was "well grounded" before they could even proceed. Many/most of the Veterans could not even pass the "well grounded" test, and their claim was denied without ever really have been given a chance. I also think the "well grounded" requirement served as a "catch all" where they could deny and not have to give a reasons and basis, but instead could say that the claim was not well grounded. That is, they were saying....your claim is denied because we said so, and please dont whine that it was a valid claim because the appeals will agree that it is not well grounded, also. I even think the appeals process..BVA, and CAVC are relatively "new" within the past 30-40 years..and before that, back in the 50's they just denied you and that was it. Others may know exact years the BVA and CAVC began. Other things are like that also. Can you imagine, say, complaining that you were discriminated against because of your race in the 1920's?

I agree with PR and Berta, and add that since we all know the VA only follows the regulations when they want to anyway, "relaxed" requirements especially for VN Vets, probably wont be followed either. I think they have already "relaxed" many of the requirements for "new" Vets anyway. Remember "new" Vets get priority over VN Vets, and there is no doubt in my mind that generations of Veterans pitted against one another is all part of the VA's plan to divide and disorganize Vets so that we are unable to launch a serious threat to the total VA dominance over Veterans, at the expense of Veterans. I think that VA Execs getting millions in bonuses while Vets get zero Cola is a great example of just how badly Vets are loosing the war against the VA. As long as the VA can violate the regulations with the the only penalty being paid by the Veteran (usually delays, denials, and lowballs), they will continue doing just that. The VA needs to pay the penalties for violating regulations, not the VEteran.

Mrs. Vet: I would like to suggest you use EXTREME caution in citing BVA decisions in your appeal, if you do it yourself. Your arguement will be weak, because the VA has many, many lawyers on staff (fighting against the Veteran) who will likely argue that the BVA decision is "non precedential", and they would be right. You might as well be telling them that your Uncle Charlie, who does not read or write, thinks you should get your benefits. I recommend you stick with Precedential CASES, that is, the Federal Circuit court, or even the supreme court. Cite CAVC case law only if you are sure it is precedential. BVA cases are almost never precedential.

Mrs Vet: The "benefit of the doubt" lies in the eyes of the beholder, and it is the RO who decides, and it takes a lot of time, and is not always successful for the Veteran to be given "the benefit of the doubt" upon appeal. Example: A "close call" is denied by the RO. The Veteran waits more than 12 months to appeal, then appeals. The appeal will almost automatically be denied, based upon an "untimely appeal", that is, a NOD filed by the Veteran MORE than 12 months after the RO decision. This "close call" will not meet the strict CUE standard, as differences in judgement calls are specifically excluded from the possibility of CUE. End result to the Veteran: The "benefit of the doubt" is ruled against the Veteran. This is not an isolated incident, and, the VA wants to shorten the appeal period to 6 months or less so that even less Veterans get the "benefit of the doubt", because that goes out the window if the Veteran can not/does not timely appeal. It would not matter even if the Veteran was in the hospital, was mentally ill, or even in a coma the entire 12 months..even for SC conditions..his appeal is automatically thrown out if it is past the one year period and the case was decided on a "judgement call". The Veteran then has to try to prove the difficult "grave procedural error" that is, CUE, in order to win his claim and there is NO benefit of the doubt, in fact, in this example, for the Veteran. Mentally ill, PTSD, or even comatose Veterans, along with other Veterans, are required to appeal within the 12 month period to get the benefit of the doubt. Since many are unable or unwilling to do that, they are, in fact, denied "benefit of the doubt". The VA uses the Veterans own disabilities against him as a lever to deny his claim.

Berta.. My 2 cents worth is to "Hit em where it hurts". The VA has a big, big embarrassing situation which they really want to "go away". I think it is Dunne himself (one of the VA very high ups) who is personally embarrased by the shredder situation, and vows to fix it. So, I say, hit them THERE..it worked for me. File a "Special Handling Request" at your RO, due to evidence not considered, so it must have been mishandled, right? Remember the VA is required to consider all evidence, in Roberson, so if they didnt consider your evidence, then file a SHR. I can save you the trouble, as it is likely that your RO will ignore your SHR. Give em a few months, the send an IRIS email as to what happened to your SHR. Your IRIS email will be given to a special team that investigates SHR's. This team will then put pressure on your RO to resolve the SHR. Then file a VAOIG complaint and tell them your SHR must have been shredded also, because the VA did not respond it it at all. They will be getting pressure from 3 places..the VAOIG, the investigation team, and you. Its a lot, and the Va does not like to get calls from these people as to why they didnt respond. Its JMHO and Experience. You already know to file the SHR before Nov. 19, tho I think it is a joke the VA can actually enforce that deadline. Dont give them any excuses to deny. As I have said before, dont lie to anyone, but, I do think it is a fair assumption, given the extent of shreddergate, that if your evidence was not considered, then it was mishandled. Remember mishandling is much more that shredding, tho certainly shredding is mishandling. YOur evidence could well have been mishandled and is one of the many piles of evidence they found stuffed into drawers and hidden, that is, mishandled. That is, you are assuming the VA follows regulations, and you should be able to assume they follow regs, even when we know they dont.

One of the problems is the RO gets to interpret the regulations in the manner they see fit. Even an "award" by the BVA can be interpreted in a negative way enabling the RO to completely deny benefits..they did just that to me. A grant or award by the BVA is supposed to mean the RO has no discretion in awarding benefits..they must simply award them per the BVA order. They dont do that. A remand is even worse. It sends the case back to the RO, sometimes with instructions on how to proceed. The RO then, at its own discretion, applies the BVA instructions (or ignores them), and re adjucicates the claim. Some Veterans claims are remanded multiple times: Claim denied by RO, claim is appealed to BVA, claim is remanded back to RO, RO denies/lowballs, Veteran appeals, BVA remands again, etc. Its what Larry Scott calls the "hampster wheel" that goes nowhere, sometimes for decades. In a report I read by the BVA they are trying to reduce the number of remands, recognizing that they frustrate the Veteran. Bottom LIne: A remand is not a "win" UNLESS the RO decides its a win and awards benefits. Even a "complete Grant" by the BVA is not a win unless the RO decides to award benefits. One way the RO "weasels" out of paying is to "Award" a zero percent rating and the Vet gets nothing. This method is not supported by case law, but the RO's do it anyway. In case nobody has told you yet, the RO often follows regualtions only when it supports their position, that is, they follow the regs when they want to. Its one of the many RO loopholes. You see, the RO wants a chance to decide a claim before its decided by the BVA. So, if the RO just shredded, overlooked, or otherwise didnt consider evidence, the BVA often remands the case, telling the RO to consider that evidence. Then the RO can come back and say , "We considered that evidence and the answer is still no, but they are supposed to give their "Reasons and basis" for denying it the second time. It is pretty easy for the RO to simply cling to the reason they denied you the first time.

Congratulations: I would like to mention that my claim was "dropped" by the VFW..they did not think I could win so withdrew their POA! I did not listen to them, persisted, and got help on hadit, and won big time, no thanks to VFW. Crazily, I had a rock solid nexus, and I guess the VFW could not read.

Your claim will take EXACTLY how long your RO "Wants" it to take. There are 57 Regional Offices and they have employees and managers that vary widely in both their competence level, and their general opinion of Veterans. While there is some legislation that requires TDIU be given expidited processing, again, it is the RO who frankly decides if they are going to comply with the Regulations or not. There is a penalty if the RO does not comply with regulations, but that penalty is ALWAYS paid by the Veteran, usually with delays and sometimes those delays can be 10 years or more. For some Veterans the RO delays are PERMANENT, that is, the VA does not get the Veterans paperwork done until the Veteran dies. Then, the Veteran's heirs get ZERO, and, once again the VA has "delayed until death" and the VA has financial incentive to do just that. Virtually no employee in the world would be expected to put up with a 10 year delay on his/her paycheck, but for Vets compensation a 10 year delay happens often enough that the VA had special regulations for it, WHEN it did happen, and those special regulations are not in the Veterans favor. (I do not beleive there are any such regulations for paying a civilian or government worker 10 years after it is due, because those employees would have gotten mad and quit years ago) Instead, when a Vets claim involved 8 years or more of retro, his claim had to go through many extra steps, for even more delay to "ensure accuracy". (Apparently 8 years was not a long enough period of time to accurately calculate the amount due to the Veteran, so "special steps" are taken) Fortunately, however, a recent court decision says the Va can no longer put Veterans who are entitled to $250,000 retro through the ringer again. I personally think that the "no time limit" for the VA is out and out criminal, and is repeatedly abused by the VA, with the Veteran Always paying the penalty, often with homelessness. If I went to work for a guy and he took as long to pay me as the VA does its Veterans, I would go to the Department of Labor and they would garnish his bank accounts to pay me. It is just one example of how our government actually treats its Veterans who made this country great worse than civilians.

Carlie... Very well, as you wish. Please amend my statement from "millions of homeless Veterans" to read "millions of homeless Veterans/their family members" so that I am not "inflating" the numbers. Sadly, the children/spouses and other family members often suffer even more than the homeless Vet.

Carlie... Probably no one knows how many homeless there are. HOw many depends on who you beleive. According to the VA one third of homeless people are Veterans. Here is one estimate of the number of homeless: http://www.washprofile.org/en/node/2295 If you take this number, and divide it by 3, then you get more than a million Veterans homeless. Add Veterans families, plus the numbers are way worse with the present economy and all the statistics are old and do not reflect the current economy, so I think "millions of homeless Vets and their families" is more accurate than "thousands". Of course, the VA minimizes the problem, claiming there are only 131,000 homeless Vets. Given the VA's history of lying to us, their numbers are highly suspect. Shinseki has recognized there are more homeless Vets than "merely" 131,000, he just did not say so directly. Even the Urban Institute that recognizes that 3.5 million homeless people (divide that by three and you get 1.16 million homeless Vets) many understate the problem, and the actual numbers may be higher. Still another issue is how you define homeless. Some people refer to homeless as anyone who has been without a home during the past year. Others define homeless as to how many show up at a shelter on a given night. Especially on warm nights, those who show up at homeless shelters is only a small fraction of the people who are actually homeless.

Timetowinarace: I would be in favor of a "march" on Washington, and as I recall, Veterans have done so, and the National Guard was called to quiet them down. Someone else may be aware of the details or a link. "Marches on Washington" have not been all that successful. For example, Pro Life Groups have marched hundreds of times, and, even tho public opinion favors Pro Life, but in more than 20 years, Roe Vs Wade has never been overturned, in spite of literally thousands of protests all over the country. Ditto for same sex marriage. There have been thousands of "gay parades", but one more state voted down same sex marriage, just in the past few weeks. I do think you are on to something, tho, and that is to "hit the VA where it hurts" which is right in the media. You see, the VA HATES bad publicity because they know they need the public and congress backing for them to get still more money next year. However, the VA is an expert at keeping the media away. Did the national media say anything about shreddergate? No...merely VA watchdog, and they dont have enough readers to bother the VA that much. Dr. Phil went on TV about the horrible treatment Vets get, in one of his episodes, but the VA knows that show is seen mostly by housewives and not by congress so they let it slide, but did you notice that CBS or NBC or MSNBC did not pick it up? The VA has their own media department and always releases flag waving propoganda about how the department of Veterans affairs is helping Vetrans. Once recent spin was the Secretary making "emergency money" available to student Veterans waiting on their Gi Bill payments. They made it sound like the VA, out of the goodness of their heart, is helping Veterans, when the reality is that there are hundreds of thousands, or even millions of Veterans waiting on education, or disability compensation while the VA is compensating its executives bonuses in the millions for a "job well done". Vets are homeless and VA execs get bonuses for it. VA watchdog even reported that VA employees got bonuses for delaying Veterans claims. Rememeber: It the VA can get away with screwing up once, they know they can repeat it on a national scale. And, the facts are that the VA gets away with screwing over millions of Veterans each year, delaying their claims, shredding their evidence, and making more Veterans homeless, all while promising to do the opposite.

Delta.. Yes, I forgot..the "Women are like Spagetti" part. To women, according to this book, everthing is all mixed up like a bowl of spagetti and everthing is touching each other..you know..love, sex, sports, EED, SMC, kids, money, etc..all related...I hope you get a laff out of this one, and hope it offends no one. One woman, who was pulled over by a police officer for DUI told the officer ON VIDEOTAPE, "Can this be settled with sex?"

Delta Wow..Thanks. I think I just may do as you suggest..appeal for SMC! However, right now, I am in the "EED" box. (Remember that book that men are like waffles, women are like spagetti? That men go into a certain "box", and those "boxes" can not touch each other. That is, if we are thinking about love, we think about love...and never anything else. If men are thinking about sports, then it would take a hurricane to get them out of that "box"....well, I am in the "EED" box now..lol)

Since there are 1,000,000 Veterans waiting on benefits, along with millions more of homeless Veterans many of whom have already given up on the VA, they have already gotten thousands of your letters before, and shredded them. One of those shredded was my application for an "Advance on the Docket" due to hardship and my impending home foreclosure. The VA didn't care and didnt even consider my application and my home was foreclosed upon in 2005. They deny that they ever got my application, and, since that way back when I still trusted the VA, I didnt keep copies, or send them certified mail return receipt requested. The President selected Shinseki to head the VA and to reduce the backlog. When Shinseki increased the claims backlog by 16% instead of reducing it, the President has apparently decided to keep Shinseki, at least until election time, then he can hire a new Secretary who will also promise to reduce the backlog, and probably enough people will buy it to get him reelected. Oh, yes, I wrote to my senator, and, since that caused further delay, next time I think I will try writing to the Easter Bunny or the Tooth Fairy. Sample Easter Bunny Letter: Dear Easter Bunny I have written to congress, the President and Santa, and since all of them were too busy to listen, I would like my VA benefits this Easter put in an egg, and I will find it no matter how well you hide it, because I have already waited so long I lost my home, and you can just hide the egg under the bridge where I now live. Signed...Still Another Homeless Veteran waiting on Benefits.