Important Statement To Include In Substantive Appeal

[Guest Morgan]

I found this Web site for VA legal representation and they posted an excellent description of the claims process, with helpful advice. It included this comment:

The purpose of the Substantive Appeal is for the claimant to set out in writing his or her "contentions" or arguments for why the VARO's denial of benefits is in error. In theory, the Substantive Appeal is supposed to identify specific items in the SOC that are in error. However, such specificity often is not possible because the SOC is poorly written, ignores issues or arguments, and contains irrelevant information. Therefore, especially if the claimant is unsure about providing a detailed response to the SOC, he or she should always include in the Substantive Appeal the following statement: "I dispute every item in the SOC that is not consistent with my claim for entitlement to the benefits at issue."

I don't know anything about these lawyers, but here's the link in case some new, or not so new, to the claims process might want to check it out.

http://www.wildhaberlaw.com/your_case.htm

[wallyg]

Morgan

Another good find!

[Pete53]

Sweet!!!!!

[Guest Berta]

Yes- GREAT Info-

I posted some appeal info from my recent I-9 and used what NVLSP suggests as to preserving errors on appeal-

under 1151 SOC Soon Josh Feb 18th

We do not really talk about this important form much-

It does not mean your claim is immediately going to the board- it means they will put you on the Docket which could be months- and even a year or more down the road-

one thing for sure is that-

this is a formal chance to attack their decision-

even if you responded to the SOC and sent in more evidence-this I-9 needs careful sttention as you prepare it-

These appeals get consideration-even if they have managed to ignore all you have sent in so far-they actually read the I-9 when you send it in.

The very day the PO verified that they received mine- things started happening with my claim-

no decision yet but it was read by the DRO, appeals team etc---

The VA had sent me a letter a few weeks ago stating a past submission from me, they would consider as the formal appeal---my vet rep had a conference with them-this was one of many issues they got all wrong- I sent them a response - a correction of their whole letter-

and asked why the VA counsel had not been given a claim that I filed in 2003 (a specifc legal issue that they cannot handle there)

They sent that claim to Counsel in Washington the same day they got my letter to the VSM.

(they told me vet rep it was in appeals but it wasn't)

No way- don't let them do that-use something you sent AS your formal appeal-I still had plenty of time to send it in----watch the 60 day limit and

spend the time to write your appeal then edit it carefully-

and focus on what this posted info says-here and in my past post under 1151 SOC -Josh-

I feel your appeal should reflect your confidence in your claim and do not hesitate for a second to attempt to knock down a negative VA med opinion and restate the specific evidence you have that

contradicts anything a VA doctor says.

Even if it is a common sense matter- state it carefully-Even if you did before-

Remember the I-9 gets some real attention at the VARO-

Like- say the doc did not use a goinometer yet the C & P blank form says he/she should have-

Dont depend on them to notice that-pounce on it-

If your C file was not present during a C & P and let's say your past med recs reveal dehabilitating migraines- 4-5 times a month and you cannot work-

yet the examiner said there is no history of current severe disablity (let's say you did not have a migraine in the past week) and overlooks the med recs that show treatment for migraines- pounce on that--

You can attach more pages to the I-9 but make sure your name, address and c file number is on them.

We should discuss this form more than we do---

I feel NO one should prepare this but the veteran-

No SO or vet rep- outline the points in the decision that denied your claim.

Not a time for lots of rhetoric or war stories-

Point out exactly what evidence the VA had but did not consider properly.

Edited February 20, 2006 by Berta