Board Of Appeals

[JayBrown1]

Why do the board remand claims back to RO?

[Berta]

Most usually because the RO didnt do the claim right in the first place.

I posted a link in claims research to the BVA Chairman's report for Fiscal Year 2006 sent to Sec Nicholson in January.

The BVA report clearly states the large amount of remands that need a re-do at the RO level.

And it states why.

[Stretch]

Sad to say what I think.

The board, by remanding, can manipulate or stall appeals before the CAVC, making it look like overall there are less claims on appeal before the Vets Court.

Some times, in doing this stall, the board will grant one claim and deny the rest in order to make it look like there was a grant rather than other denials.

Maybe this is just the resul of a coincidence of the remands.

[Ricky]

I think both of you are right and it depends on the timing of the appeal. However, the BVA could cause a stall in either direction. If it renders a decision and, lets say, does not provide adequate reasons and bases, the ineffective kangaroo court can only remand it back to the board, who then upon relook decides the RO should have........ see my point. If they wanted to they could really put a stall on the claim.

Once on the docket always on the docket at BVA. Not taking up for these fools but the claim remans a stat against them until a final decision is rendered.

My question is why can they not just simply unfuddle the damn claim. It would make it so much simpler. They simply fix all of the RO mess ups and make a final decision. I know the DAV filed an action sometime ago with the court which resulted in stopping the board from further developing the claim at their level. I do not know what prompted this but I guess it was appropriate. Anyway I just wish they would fix the claim and make a decision on the dang thing without remanding it.

[jbasser]

Jay, I moved your post to the claims and research forum. It will allow you to receive additional help on your question which is about remands. That topic is more suited for this section

John

[Berta]

I disagree that the BVA "stalls" claims-

In his Jan.2007 report to Nicholson, James Terry-Chairman of the BVA, clearly identifys the problems regarding remands.

The RO has a job to do. If they dont do it, they have to re-do it upon remand.

I have been reading BVA decisions since 1991. I have only seen one BVA decision in the last 5-6 years that I felt was wrong but have not read them all-

The US CAVC bears out the fact that most often -the BVA decision is correct.

It is claims stalled at the regional level-the ones that get into the wrong stack and never get a legal VCAA letter-and vet reps who allow that DTA violation to occur knowing this will tie the claim up in limbo for years- that is the "stall" problem.

The report states the steps the BVA has taken to reduce the remand rate (page 3)

In FY 2006 the BAV reduced the remand rate over 6 %.

Their rate of error was reduced and is now only 93%.

(I think the AMC checks BVA decisions and determines that- dont know for sure )

"75 % of cases remanded are subsequently returned to the Board which increases the workload and degrades timeliness". (James Terry BVA report Jan 2007)

"Eliminating avoidable remands is a goal that will provide better service to veterans and their families...." (James Terry BVA Report Jan 2007)

It is not the BVA who causes stalls- it is the R0s, poor vet representation, illegal VCAA letters , and

often the claimant themselves in failing to provide enough evidence for VA to award.

A legal VCAA letter will state -more clearly than any SOC-what the VA still needs in order to award the claim.

Good reps will go over this line by line and the veteran should also-

BVA remands also clearly state what is lacking-and a remand contains the information the veteran needs to obtain.

Even if the remand is directed to the RO -still it is often up to the veteran to secure the info needed themselves or to at least check that the VA is getting the info-

This is just my opinion but I do disagree with anyone saying that the BVA stalls claims.

I dont feel the facts bear that out at all.

[SLEDGE]

Well, I'm in that small percentage of claims that the BVA 'really screwed-up'.

How many returns does the BVA need before they actually open the C-file?

On one occasion in my case.

The roo court specifically remanded back to the 'BVA' to correct one of the 'BVA' errors.

The BVA did not follow the court's instructions, period.

That's two for two on the same error on the same claim.

The action taken by the BVA, in response to the court order, indicated that somebody at the BVA is incredibly out of touch with the world or English is not their native language.

Since then and now I've been remanded, denied, granted, reopened, denied reopening because of no new evidence and refused all but the most basic medical care.

(I can get a blood test and pressure check anywhere for less than the cost of the trip to my VA PCP.)

I'm back at the court, again, because after we finally got back to the BVA, the BVA still did not follow the court's instructions.

That would be 3 outa 3 on the latest, individual, court remand back to the BVA.

I would love to see an investigation into this stuff but, that would be by the VA, huh?

By the way, I already know what the problem is and it's got nothing to do with claims or medical conditions or service connection.

Thanks for reading my rant.

sledge