Jump to content

Ask Your VA Claims Questions | Read Current Posts 
Read VA Disability Claims Articles
Search | View All Forums | Donate | Blogs | New Users | Rules 

  • tbirds-va-claims-struggle (1).png

  • Donate Now and Keep Us Helping You

     

  • 0

Carlie

Rate this question


Berta

Question

I filed my 14.633 complaint in October and never read this before at the OGC site or the Federal Register site:

VA Published Accreditation Regulations

On October 12, 2007, VA published in the Federal Register final rule AM29, Accreditation of Service Organization Representatives and Agents, amending 38 C.F.R. §§ 14.629 and 14.633. The final rule will: (1) require veterans service organizations (VSO) to periodically recertify the qualifications of accredited representatives; (2) require VSOs to notify VA's Office of the General Counsel when a VSO's request to cancel a representative's accreditation is based on misconduct or lack of competence; and, (3) add procedures for suspension of accreditation and reinstatement following suspension.

After publication of the proposed rule, the President signed Public Law 109-461 amending chapter 59 of title 38, United States Code, governing the representation of veterans before VA. As a result of these amendments, proposed procedures for the periodic recertification of agents were dropped from the final rule.

In comments to the proposed rule, VSOs expressed concern regarding their ability to recertify representatives in a timely manner. To address this concern, the rule is effective 90 days from the date of publication, January 10, 2008. Moreover, compliance dates for recertification of accredited representatives will be phased in over a 15-month period according to the first letter of the last name of the representative and the first group of recertifications, for those representatives with last names beginning with the letters A through F, must be complete not later than April 9, 2008. For questions regarding this rule, please call VA's Office of the General Counsel at (202) 273‑6315.

(Link to full text of final regulation)

from: http://www.va.gov/ogc/accreditation.asp

Whoop ti DOOOOO - the rule will take time but still here is some oversight on these reps from the OGC---

If lawyers have to take tests to rep vets then vet org reps should be tested from time to time too----

they all have about a year to get up to speed.

Good news that I just found thanks to Carlie!

GRADUATE ! Nov 2nd 2007 American Military University !

When thousands of Americans faced annihilation in the 1800s Chief

Osceola's response to his people, the Seminoles, was

simply "They(the US Army)have guns, but so do we."

Sameo to us -They (VA) have 38 CFR ,38 USC, and M21-1- but so do we.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Answers 4
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters For This Question

Top Posters For This Question

4 answers to this question

Recommended Posts

PS-the actual reg does not mean they are requiring reps to take annual tests- I just wish it did-

the Fed Register has the complete regulation and what it calls for is re-certification- meaning someone in charge of vet org reps (and state reps) has to formally somehow -by performance appraisals etc-determine that the rep continues to be competent enough to represent claimants.

The actual reg contains the public comments from some state orgs and chartered orgs.The lawyer who is named as the contact person for the OGC and appears to have written this reg is the same one I spoke to in October who told me to send my complaint directly to him.

I am encouraged by this new regulation- but many vets simply get a different vet rep if they have gotten lousy service for their claim.

That changes nothing-the rep who messed up there claim just goes on to mess up some other vets claim.

Any vet or wiodw can file a complaint under 14.633 (38 USC) with the OGC if they have strong belief and better yet even some proof that their representation hindered their claim.

Edited by Berta

GRADUATE ! Nov 2nd 2007 American Military University !

When thousands of Americans faced annihilation in the 1800s Chief

Osceola's response to his people, the Seminoles, was

simply "They(the US Army)have guns, but so do we."

Sameo to us -They (VA) have 38 CFR ,38 USC, and M21-1- but so do we.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Thanks, Berta and Carlie...this is particularly interesting news to me, especially since I discovered that my VSO was removed in November and I now have a new VSO (a female). I have already talked to her (she called me). That was a shock. I spoke with my previous VSO about four or five times in 2 years.

Maybe things are about to change for the better. I'm sure news/media coverage in the past months and the big donation DAV just received from GMC doesn't hurt their realization that change is necessary.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

LUVhim I was stunned by this info-

The VA itself does have some oversight regarding these vet reps.

The VA lawyer Mike-who is mentioned in the actual Federal registry as the contact person and I think the one who wrote this-was just great to talk too-

as I have found everyone at the Washington Level of VA to be.

What a difference to be able to talk VA talk with someone who fully comprehends the regs etc.

I have heard nothing yet from him but recently sent him some info I felt he should have.

I am so upset about it might as well briefly gripe here-

I was witness to intimidation of an elderly cancer patient by my POA who forced him to rescind his POA because- get this-

the vet brought him more info from me for his claim- and this was a vet the rep had initially asked me to help!

I had clear email documentation of how I rasied hell over this event and got a higher level rep right at the RO to pull the revocation out of the PC-

(at least he said he did in email- but that too might have been one more piece of documented fiction from these guys)-

The VA Chaplain told me recently this vet had died and I had asked the OGC to look into his case-in my complaint.He had an excellent claim.

I dont think they even supported it at all- the vet who pulled the revoke fiasco told him a different 1151 claim he had went to the BVA.(I was asked to prepare the NOD-I found clear medical evidence if medical error that caused him additional disability but it wasnt worth much- maybe 10%-the other claim I prepared was for another matter and worth 100%.)

The vet told me this by phone last year-

I was surprised- how would it get there without the vet knowing and the rep had told him it was "in Washington"-he said he didnt file out any I-9 -the rep must have- and besides this RO doesnt work that fast-

I was heartbroken when I found out he died but I am glad I told the OGC about his claims.I hope the news of his death doesn't mean Mike at OGC cant look into it further.

Edited by Berta

GRADUATE ! Nov 2nd 2007 American Military University !

When thousands of Americans faced annihilation in the 1800s Chief

Osceola's response to his people, the Seminoles, was

simply "They(the US Army)have guns, but so do we."

Sameo to us -They (VA) have 38 CFR ,38 USC, and M21-1- but so do we.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.


  • Tell a friend

    Love HadIt.com’s VA Disability Community Vets helping Vets since 1997? Tell a friend!
  • Recent Achievements

    • OddBal79 earned a badge
      Reacting Well
    • OddBal79 earned a badge
      Conversation Starter
    • OddBal79 earned a badge
      First Post
    • AFguy1999 earned a badge
      Week One Done
    • kidva went up a rank
      Explorer
  • Our picks

    • These decisions have made a big impact on how VA disability claims are handled, giving veterans more chances to get benefits and clearing up important issues.

      Service Connection

      Frost v. Shulkin (2017)
      This case established that for secondary service connection claims, the primary service-connected disability does not need to be service-connected or diagnosed at the time the secondary condition is incurred 1. This allows veterans to potentially receive secondary service connection for conditions that developed before their primary condition was officially service-connected. 

      Saunders v. Wilkie (2018)
      The Federal Circuit ruled that pain alone, without an accompanying diagnosed condition, can constitute a disability for VA compensation purposes if it results in functional impairment 1. This overturned previous precedent that required an underlying pathology for pain to be considered a disability.

      Effective Dates

      Martinez v. McDonough (2023)
      This case dealt with the denial of an earlier effective date for a total disability rating based on individual unemployability (TDIU) 2. It addressed issues around the validity of appeal withdrawals and the consideration of cognitive impairment in such decisions.

      Rating Issues

      Continue Reading on HadIt.com
      • 0 replies
    • I met with a VSO today at my VA Hospital who was very knowledgeable and very helpful.  We decided I should submit a few new claims which we did.  He told me that he didn't need copies of my military records that showed my sick call notations related to any of the claims.  He said that the VA now has entire military medical record on file and would find the record(s) in their own file.  It seemed odd to me as my service dates back to  1981 and spans 34 years through my retirement in 2015.  It sure seemed to make more sense for me to give him copies of my military medical record pages that document the injuries as I'd already had them with me.  He didn't want my copies.  Anyone have any information on this.  Much thanks in advance.  
      • 4 replies
    • Caluza Triangle defines what is necessary for service connection
      Caluza Triangle – Caluza vs Brown defined what is necessary for service connection. See COVA– CALUZA V. BROWN–TOTAL RECALL

      This has to be MEDICALLY Documented in your records:

      Current Diagnosis.   (No diagnosis, no Service Connection.)

      In-Service Event or Aggravation.
      Nexus (link- cause and effect- connection) or Doctor’s Statement close to: “The Veteran’s (current diagnosis) is at least as likely due to x Event in military service”
      • 0 replies
    • Do the sct codes help or hurt my disability rating 
    • VA has gotten away with (mis) interpreting their  ambigious, , vague regulations, then enforcing them willy nilly never in Veterans favor.  

      They justify all this to congress by calling themselves a "pro claimant Veteran friendly organization" who grants the benefit of the doubt to Veterans.  

      This is not true, 

      Proof:  

          About 80-90 percent of Veterans are initially denied by VA, pushing us into a massive backlog of appeals, or worse, sending impoverished Veterans "to the homeless streets" because  when they cant work, they can not keep their home.  I was one of those Veterans who they denied for a bogus reason:  "Its been too long since military service".  This is bogus because its not one of the criteria for service connection, but simply made up by VA.  And, I was a homeless Vet, albeit a short time,  mostly due to the kindness of strangers and friends. 

          Hadit would not be necessary if, indeed, VA gave Veterans the benefit of the doubt, and processed our claims efficiently and paid us promptly.  The VA is broken. 

          A huge percentage (nearly 100 percent) of Veterans who do get 100 percent, do so only after lengthy appeals.  I have answered questions for thousands of Veterans, and can only name ONE person who got their benefits correct on the first Regional Office decision.  All of the rest of us pretty much had lengthy frustrating appeals, mostly having to appeal multiple multiple times like I did. 

          I wish I know how VA gets away with lying to congress about how "VA is a claimant friendly system, where the Veteran is given the benefit of the doubt".   Then how come so many Veterans are homeless, and how come 22 Veterans take their life each day?  Va likes to blame the Veterans, not their system.   
×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

Guidelines and Terms of Use