90 Day Letter On Its Way From Bva

[Josephine]

Here is the latest, I think I have had it!!

Well, I just called the BVA. I was told my claims file left

the legal team

and now I have been mailed a 90 day letter to respond.

What can they possibly do to me now?

I have been at the BVA remanded to AMC for another almost two years

and before I receive the SSOC. The claims examiner calls me to advise

me to waiver my 60 days to submit new evidence to AMC.

She politely walks the file back to BVA.

I secure the IME and I think now it is being

considered as " NEW EVIDENCE".

Doesn't it sound like, I am starting the process again?

I will never live to see the end of this claim.

I may just have to drop the whole darn mess.

I don't know how to fight this thing any longer.

Always,

Betty

[Josephine]

This sounds like a due process thing... that before they let the BVA decide the claim - they have to make sure the vet has been afforded all the protection of due process (that you have the right to have the RO review the evidence before the BVA decides - and that you have to officially waive that right - i.e. they can't take it away..)

I thought you already waived that though...

Free

Free,

I did place the waiver, but given another opportunity, I will bring it out of there.

I would rather deal with the R. O.

The AMC is a pit hole of ignorant people.

Betty

[Berta]

I think Free Spirit is correct- as this sounds like a 90 day transfer letter-giving a claimant time to submit more evidence-

I dont think the letter will say what they specifically want-

just giving more time for more evidence- at least that is what my transfer letter said last year.

And then they remanded it immedately to the RO as I complied within the 90 days with more evidence etc.

[Josephine]

I think Free Spirit is correct- as this sounds like a 90 day transfer letter-giving a claimant time to submit more evidence-

I dont think the letter will say what they specifically want-

just giving more time for more evidence- at least that is what my transfer letter said last year.

And then they remanded it immedately to the RO as I complied within the 90 days with more evidence etc.

Berta,

since I have already spent two years in the dis-organized AMC. I do think it would be in my best interest to bring the file back to the R. O.

As it is now, I have no represenation in D. C.

Thanks,

Betty

[free_spirit_etc]

I am not sure if it is starting over - I would think you could do as the lawyer did in the case you posted - Submit MORE evidence - and THEN submit a waiver that lets them know you have submitted all you have to submit and you waive the remainder of the 90 days - and waive the right to have the evidence considered by the RO - and ask that the BVA decide your case without waiting for the 90 days to expire.

Of course, the BVA then would have the option of deciding your case or remanding your case back to either the RO or AMC.

If you want to RO to review the new evidence, rather than the BVA - I would imagine that MIGHT take longer - as it is kind of starting over - i.e. the case being sent BACK to the RO because of New Evidence, not as the result of the Remand.

It seems like they are going to toss this back and forth. Not sure if the RO is going to be willing to decide in your favor. It seems like they are more prone to decide very clear cut cases - and they pass the rest of them up to the BVA. And the BVA often remands them back telling the RO what they are supposed to consider.

Not sure what the best way is to get out of the hokey pokey - but going back to the RO MIGHT just add time -- because I would think that if they deny - you have to go through the NOD again, and waiting a year for the statement of case again - and then the DRO again - and then waiting for the SSOC again - and then the I-9 again - and then waiting to get on the BVA docket again - HOPING that they DECIDE the case - and don't pass it back down by remanding it to the RO or AMC.

I may be wrong -- I am not fully educated on the whole process. But I would encourage you to not make a decision to start back with the RO - until you find out what that decision will entail.

Right now - you have reached the place where you CAN ask the BVA to decide - and they MIGHT remand it (and you don't get to choose who they remand it to - if they issue a remand). But before deciding to go the route of NOT waiving the right to have the RO consider the evidence - check out where that path can lead you.

And then pick the best path.

Free

[free_spirit_etc]

Another point to keep in mind while deciding what to do - is being sure you have the evidence you need to win the claim at the BVA.

The Court of Veteran's appeals won't actually re-decide claims. They can decide the law and regulations weren't followed - but they won't retry the facts. So they won't get into the issue of how evidence was weighed. They won't determine that your evidence is more credible than the BVA said it was.

If the BVA denies - and there is ANY evidence to support the denial - the Court won't put the decision aside on THAT basis. (They won't say your evidence was stronger than the evidence the BVA relied on). If there are medical opinions that support the BVA's decision - they will uphold it and not redecide what weight that evidence would have been afforded.

However, the Court can put a decision aside for OTHER reasons.

My gut feeling is that the BVA won't deny your claim - because of the new evidence you submitted. My personal opinion is that they will most likely either grant the claim (make a decision that the evidence supports your claim enough that they can grant it) or that they will Remand the claim - (decide that the new evidence raises enough possibility that your claim should be granted - that they won't deny - and they remand it back for further development).

I can't see them denying the claim with the weak report they got from the doctors they specifically asked to either revise their opinion upon consideration of the new evidence - or PROVIDE REASONING as to why they hold the same opinion.

The fact that they merely listed what they considered and said they didn't change their opinion - with NO reasons as to why -- and the fact that your new IMO points out they had no medically supportable reason to give you that diagnosis in the first place -- HAS to be addressed.

So I would look for the BVA to decide in your favor or remand. I don't see how they can deny it at this point.

Free

[john999]

Betty

The day you win your claim we are going to throw a Hadit party. You will be a bright and shinning light to all those who are fighting the power.

John King