Lawyers

[Berta]

Has anyone approached any of your personal lawyers to see if they would be willing to handle veterans claims under the Lawyers for Vets regs? (they havent been posted yet)

I have a matter with my new lawyer and in the cover letter I asked him also if he would consider representing vets- my regular lawyer went to Florida- A Vietnam vet with 2 PHs but I had to help him with his VA claim so he probably could not have handled other vets claims-unless I helped him-

I dont know if my new lawyer is willing to do this- he will probably need a lot of help too ---from any claimant he represents-

and if he does this I sure will get him here at hadit for the nitty gritty-maybe even someone else in his firm would handle vet claims -dont know yet-they are still in process of moving to Bath NY from Penn Yan.

Lawyers dont deal with 38 USC much in law school and it all changes from year to year-

Have any of you found any lawyers that are even aware of this new law?

I mentioned in another post I was considering something to benefit a non profit vets org-

my money, along with their willingness to support some issues.

Of course the best of all is NVLSP. I havent donated to them in a long time.

But I also am considering maybe instead -a Class Action suit against VA due to violations of the VCAA-

I will pay all of the legal fees but I am more concerned about if my lawyer can help with that than even help wth my claim after June-

Have any of you found lawyers who would be willing on contingency to help prosecute your claims after June?

Things have changed so much with VA lately- the data theft, the Walter Reed fiasco, numerous other issues-that it seems to be the time is ripe for vets to do enough to make a difference.

And the Fed Register site alone offers anyone the right to comment on proposed VA regs-

a vet or widow is clicks away from having input into the way the VA does business as far as the regs go.

There are two proposed regs there now- and comment time is closing by May 12th I think-

[free_spirit_etc]

I am thinking that when the original law was passed the dollar amount specified equaled about a month's pay. But now that same restricted amount doesn't amount to anything for a lawyer.

But the law is supposed to protect vets (ahem) from being taken advantage of by lawyers --

I was reading a case the other day where a lawyer's fee agreement had been approved for a widow to fight for service connecting her husband's death. They seem to do it kind of like SSA --where they approve of the fee agreement and then take the money out of the retro up-front.

THAT might be a way to discourage vets from hiring lawyers - make the wait forever for fee agreements to be approved.

Anyway -- the woman won and was awarded retro and the lawyer got his cut. But then the woman had a disabled child who was entitled to DIC in his own right. So she filed for retro for HIM - and it was awarded at the RO level.

The lawyer tried to take a ut of that -- and the Court denied him fees as the child's retro was awarded at the RO level --which was the nonadvesarial portion of the process.(where you aren't supposed to NEED a lawyer).

Had they had to go further up the chain to get the child approved - he would have been granted a portion of the retro.

So -- if the VA REALLY wants to protect vets from lawyers - they could do THOSE kind of agreements - and start approving more claims at the RO level (without remands).

Of course, lawyers probably won't help with the claims much UNTIL it goes above RO in that case.

So it would be kind of like dropping the bar for where you are allowed a lawyer to the BVA instead of the CVA.

In the comparison of SSA to VA -- another nice touch to the SSA process is that it seems like the upper levels of appeal look at the facts - and if the facts are in favor of the claimant - they just go ahead an AWARD it -- rather than send it back and forth on a never ending series of remands...

Like with my husband's claim for the one time dental treatment. The BVA remanded the claim --telling the RO that my husabnd just wanted treatment --not compensation. The RO, instead of granting treatment --proceeded to develop the claim AGAINST compensation --though they did notify the out patient dental clinic of my husban's request.

The out patient clinic sent him a letter stating his dental wasn't service connected. But neither the RO or BVA EVER denied the claim for treatment -- they just kept focusing on compensation. The RO denied compensation again -- the BVA remanded for further development to MAKE SURE he didn't qualify for compensation -- meanwhile everyone kept ignoring he just wanted treatment...

Even on the final denial --the BVA stated that the decision was for compensation ALONE -- and not about the TREATMENT.

No one EVER issued a decision about the treatment...they just kept bouncing it back and forth.

How much easier would it have been for the BVA to say:

THe RO denied compensation. The Vet asked for treatment. THe law states vets are entitled to ONE TIME treatment for any dental conditions that were not treated within 90 days of discharge.

The man was in the service 28 years. He wants his treatment he is entitled to under law. FIX HIS TEETH!

Free

Free

[free_spirit_etc]

So would it be rude to ask the VA to cover the expense of digging my husband up -- fixing his teeth like they should have in the first place -- re-buryig him (planting the grass back, of course) and letting him have the dental work he was entitled to - but denied --)

Free - another widow just wanting her vet husband to get what he was entitled to....

In the comparison of SSA to VA -- another nice touch to the SSA process is that it seems like the upper levels of appeal look at the facts - and if the facts are in favor of the claimant - they just go ahead an AWARD it -- rather than send it back and forth on a never ending series of remands...

Like with my husband's claim for the one time dental treatment. The BVA remanded the claim --telling the RO that my husabnd just wanted treatment --not compensation. The RO, instead of granting treatment --proceeded to develop the claim AGAINST compensation --though they did notify the out patient dental clinic of my husban's request.

The out patient clinic sent him a letter stating his dental wasn't service connected. But neither the RO or BVA EVER denied the claim for treatment -- they just kept focusing on compensation. The RO denied compensation again -- the BVA remanded for further development to MAKE SURE he didn't qualify for compensation -- meanwhile everyone kept ignoring he just wanted treatment...

Even on the final denial --the BVA stated that the decision was for compensation ALONE -- and not about the TREATMENT.

No one EVER issued a decision about the treatment...they just kept bouncing it back and forth.

How much easier would it have been for the BVA to say:

THe RO denied compensation. The Vet asked for treatment. THe law states vets are entitled to ONE TIME treatment for any dental conditions that were not treated within 90 days of discharge.

The man was in the service 28 years. He wants his treatment he is entitled to under law. FIX HIS TEETH!

Free

Free

[Josephine]

Free,

My prayers and thoughts are with you. I will let Berta answer this one for you, as she is also a widow of a vet.

Always,

Josephine

[free_spirit_etc]

You are SO sweet!

Actually, I was pretty much being sarcastic.....

I'm not sure I would trust the VA to not lose my husband.Plus -- they would have to find someone that can read -- to find his name to know where to put him back... ;)

Free

Free,

My prayers and thoughts are with you. I will let Berta answer this one for you, as she is also a widow of a vet.

Always,

Josephine

[Josephine]

Free,

I knew exactly what you were doing and I know exactly how you feel. That is true, they probably don't have the sense of a "Bed Bug".

Seriously do take care and do let me know, if there is anything that I can do for you.

Josephine

[Berta]

I wish they could dig up my husband (he was cremated however) so I could show him he finally won his claims.

Dont know about the dental and exhumation----

I often wonder how many veterans were ever exhumed for an autopsy to see why they really died.

When Dr. Eliot-Chief of CArdiology VA -Gainseville- autopsied deceased Vietnams vets who died in country he was astonished at the level of atherosclerosis many of them had-at a ver young age-He attributed this to the stress of combat and wrote a book on it.

I swiped his book from the VA library and sent it to VA to support a claim I had-

they got mad and sent it back to the VA library-

Maybe that is the claim that VA filed a Motion for reconsideration on at the BVA last year-

Even a VA doc in a SOC stated Rod's PTSD was making his other physical disabilties worse.

The book is "Is it Worth Dying For"

Here is a VA doctor connecting PTSD to heart disease and of course- his rationale is disregarded by the VA.

Maybe I should ask him for an IMO?

But I think they will award AO death instead anyhow.