Dav, Keep'em Or Fire'em?

[Domepeace]

All,

I have a claim pending in D.C. (BVA). This claim has been ongoing since 2004. I call D.C. to ask what the hold-up is and they tell me that my file is with DAV in D.C. and BVA is waiting on DAV to review it and send it back to them for a rating decision.

I call DAV in D.C. and they tell me they are back-logged and it will take about nine months for them to get to my file. I'm wondering should I fire DAV and have my case decide ASAP? Mind you, when I looked at my c-file, DAV pretty much regurgitated what I had researched and written in my statement. It appears that DAV is not really adding to my case.

I'm not sure if I can even fire DAV and get them to send my file back to the BVA. This whole situation was brought on because I also have two cases at my RO; in which they said via letter that they do not have access to my file because it is stuck in D.C. They also said I would have to wait until my claim in D.C. is finished before they can proceed on my RO cases. Any comments would be appreciated.

Thanks,

Domepeace

[Stretch]

Here is a post from wings for the NOD. This post has some info about the AMC.

http://www.hadit.com/forums/index.php?s=&a...st&p=142997

I am hunting, Hadit, for the rules for AMC that I posted some time ago. There is no doubt that the rules are not always followed. The could have changed since my claims.

[Stretch]

Here are the rules as Allen post them 3/9/07. This was about the same time I post them.

http://www.hadit.com/forums/index.php?s=&a...ost&p=48164

It is possible that the BVA remand went to the AMC and then back to the VARO for a decision or rating.

[Stretch]

I give up. After looking through several pages of prior post for the AMC I came up with this link from Hadit.

http://www.google.com/custom?hl=en&saf...tart=0&sa=N

[CSM-H]

Domepeace, I also have claims at the AMC and at the RO in Wilmington DE. (former DAV NSO) You can release your POA, but another VSO will not pick you up until the issues are cleared that they did not work on.

I just sent three letters to Baltimore, AMC and Wilmington to revoke my POA with DAV. They are in turmoil, NSO's and Supervisors are quiting or being fired all over the country. Definately in the DC Metro Area (Roanoke/Baltimore/DC) The DC office is now pretty much a "contact" office, won't do much for you and if they try it will not be in a timely manner. Goodluck, Hadit will do more than they did, get rid of them. CSM-H

All,

I have a claim pending in D.C. (BVA). This claim has been ongoing since 2004. I call D.C. to ask what the hold-up is and they tell me that my file is with DAV in D.C. and BVA is waiting on DAV to review it and send it back to them for a rating decision.

I call DAV in D.C. and they tell me they are back-logged and it will take about nine months for them to get to my file. I'm wondering should I fire DAV and have my case decide ASAP? Mind you, when I looked at my c-file, DAV pretty much regurgitated what I had researched and written in my statement. It appears that DAV is not really adding to my case.

I'm not sure if I can even fire DAV and get them to send my file back to the BVA. This whole situation was brought on because I also have two cases at my RO; in which they said via letter that they do not have access to my file because it is stuck in D.C. They also said I would have to wait until my claim in D.C. is finished before they can proceed on my RO cases. Any comments would be appreciated.

Thanks,

Domepeace

[Pete53]

Can anyone bring us up to date on DAV and what is going on?

[MikeR]

The lawyer says that if the BVA rejects me then I can use him to go to the court. My NOD was prior to 2007. When I called the BVA today they said that my file was still with DAV in DC. This is a shock as I was under the impression that they were just going to rubber stamp it, and send it along. I had the BVA letter and evidence all ready to go to the BVA, and I sent it. The Gal at the BVA suggested that I write a letter to waive RO Cleveland review and have the file go to the BVA. This sounded logical to me so I included it in the packet.