Any Thoughts

[Berta]

The Director of Buffalo VARO received copy of a letter and again,with it ,copies of my IMOs that I has sent to Dep Sec Manfield.

She states Issue one as a claim in appeal status. (this specific claim has never been denied and the VSM promised me a decision on it 2 or 3 tmes since Jan 2003.It involves a legal question issue)

How can it be in appeals staus without any denial?

Issue # she states is my main AO death claim,currently in appeals status.

Issue # 3 she states-as the VA stated erroneously in 2006-

is a claim cutrently in appeal status to be considered by the BVA.

(I already informed the BVA that this claim was withdrawn when I filed the 2 CUE claims. needed to make sure this issue was a final one before filing the CUE claims)

The letter states that an SSOC was prepared "after additional evidence was received." for my AO claim.

WRONG- the SSOC indicates clearly that my vet rep never presented my IMO and that I had not presented additional evidence.

On Jan 17, 2006 I again responded to the SSOC with the initial IMO and referred the VA to the additional other medical evidence they have never addressed.

This recent letter states:

"We accepted your letter dated January 17,2006 in lieu of a substantial appeal (VA form I-9)" (this happened within a second conference -with my vet rep-unknown to me at the time)

I filed a formal I-9 on Feb 4, 2006 fully within the appeal period-again attaching my medical evidence.

"These issues are ready to be transferred to the BVA.

However an appeal cannot be transferred to the BVA while there is an active issue before the Buffalo Regional Office."

It goes on to give status of my CUE claims- with a DRO.

During the week the second conference occurred with my vet rep- at that time they decided to send my AO claim to the BVA.

I didnt know for 6 months.They decided to use my SSOC response as a formal appeal.???

Is that kosher?

As you all know due to their illegal 2003 VCAA letter and the fact they still had not considered my IMOs (2 at that time) the BVA,upon receipt of my letter requesting immediate remand,, remanded the whole thing back to them in a few weeks.The BVA had the I-9 and the IMOs and sent this all back.Sept 2006.

In Dec 2006 VA states in Iris that they never received the IMOs.

I sent them again.

I should have asked if the I-9 was there too.

The VSM stated to me in recent email that this claim is with a DRO.

My phone log shows this AO claim has been to rating and specialist and back to DRo, rating, DRO etc numerous times since Sept 2006.

I am correcting her letter and sending the whole thing back to Mansfield so I get a response from her-

Question-could it be that NYSDVA

(I charged them with failing to properly handle my evidence at the first conference in 2005 with the DRO in complaint to the OGC)

made sure my actual I-9 was ignored too?

With 2 strong IMOs I feel I am still good to the gitgo and with the prior FTCA malpractice award ,that also lends credence to my IMOs.

Question-what benefit would a state service agency have to deliberately insure my claim would be in the system for over 5 years already without having my medical evidence being addressed?

Especially when not once but twice vet reps from NYSDVA has conferences first with a DRO and then with the VSM?

If I could come up with a logical answer to that -

maybe I could understand why this happened-

Better yet -I have more evidence for my complaint filed with the OGC.

Maybe the OGC can get an answer.

The Director clearly states in this letter as I quoted-

andf she is correct-

"An appeal cannot be transferred to the BVA while there is an active issue before the Buffalo Regional Office."

But they did just that in 2006 and my vet reps stood by and allowed that to occur.

One thing is for sure- the VA once they put something on paper-

is giving claimants documentation as to how messed up the system is.

Ad when they do that-it can be used against them.

Sorry for long gripe-I have never seen any claim so messed up like mine is and I wonder how many vets or widows got the same crap either from this VARO or NYSDVA-or worse yet-

both of these entities-joining together to make sure certain claims would

not succeed.

[Berta]

Im not worried about my I-9 at all- even discussed it with Ron Abrams NVLSP- he said he was very glad I posted at hadit the exact format he recommends in the VBM which I used.

It is here under a search.

Actually I am not really worried about my claim- the evidence is there-and with the OGC too in case they lose it again-I am worried about the other vets and widows here in NYS who think their state reps did what they said they would do and might find out years down the road that their claim was mishandled so bad that they are back to day one.

I was not the only claimant whose claim they (NYS)messed up and I told the GC the info I had on other claimants too .

I dont even think the VA lost my stuff-I think it was removed from my C file by my POA because he messed up big time at a DRO review.

My dated evidence for my AO claim-if in the C file-proves that he lied.

[john999]

Berta

I think the VA's response shows bad faith and gross incompetence. Most vets and spouses would have given up long ago and the VA knows it. They figure on outlasting you. No punishment for them gumming up the works for years and years, so why not?

[Berta]

John-they sent me an additional Iris response this AM-

I do have confirmation (from the VSM who emailed it to me) that they have all of my evidence and if it disappeared again- they know the IM0s are with the OGC.

I recently had to write to Paul Hutter (General Counsel) on another matter and told him too what is going on.Two top lawyers at the OGC know about this.

Not that they can do anything about my claim- my dealing with them are on 2 completely different matters-

but at least the VA has my evidence in their possession.

Something funny went on between VA and my POA in 2005 and 2006.

as documented evidence appears to reveal.

Just think -this could be proof in the long run-that deals are made between reps and the VA-deals that are detrimental to one claimant in order to award another claimant.