Just Want To Share This - Especially For Claimants

[carlie]

Here I sit going thru more VAola and I'm having a hard time

wrapping my head around this one.

When you start wondering why everything seems so screwed up

with VA - I hope you will remember this.

This is just one little correspondence from BVA

that has me livid for now.

dated Feb 26,2005

This is just the cover letter page:

"This is in further reference to the appeal you have filed from our decision

on your claim for benefits.

It is not a decision on the appeal you have initiated.

It is a Supplemental Statement of the Case which contains changes or additions

to the original Statement of the Case sent to you on June 17, 2002 and August 12,2003.

A previous Supplemental Statement of the Case was sent on August 12,2003.

We are giving you a period of 60 days to make any comments you wish

concerning the additional information.

OK now - lets recap this,

It is a SSOC dated Feb 26,2005

the original SOC was sent June 17, 2002

followed by another SSOC Aug 12, 2003

How in the hell are we even supposed to understand what the heck

they have done and respond in 60 days.

BTW, this claim was filed around 1999,

right now it's at BVA - BUT - Remanded to the AMC - BUT Remanded to the RO.

I am drowning in their feces.

carlie

[c&p man]

Here I sit going thru more VAola and I'm having a hard time

wrapping my head around this one.

When you start wondering why everything seems so screwed up

with VA - I hope you will remember this.

This is just one little correspondence from BVA

that has me livid for now.

dated Feb 26,2005

This is just the cover letter page:

"This is in further reference to the appeal you have filed from our decision

on your claim for benefits.

It is not a decision on the appeal you have initiated.

It is a Supplemental Statement of the Case which contains changes or additions

to the original Statement of the Case sent to you on June 17, 2002 and August 12,2003.

A previous Supplemental Statement of the Case was sent on August 12,2003.

We are giving you a period of 60 days to make any comments you wish

concerning the additional information.

OK now - lets recap this,

It is a SSOC dated Feb 26,2005

the original SOC was sent June 17, 2002

followed by another SSOC Aug 12, 2003

How in the hell are we even supposed to understand what the heck

they have done and respond in 60 days.

BTW, this claim was filed around 1999,

right now it's at BVA - BUT - Remanded to the AMC - BUT Remanded to the RO.

I am drowning in their feces.

carlie

sorry to hear that ....but i compain aobut 1 month of wiating bc i ve been screwed by va dr's ..for example i had urince freuency problems for 2 years and my visit last week to my primary dr at the va ...he stated pt urine freq problem resolved...just bc i didnt say anything bc i was focuse on other immedaite problems... resolved if i wouldnt get my mediacal records each time i never get favorable c and p exams....so i am sorry to hear you had to wiat any length of time bc you and me ond other should have to wiat and die before we get benfits we deserve....i recommend everyone pick up ur medical records you would be surprised what they say......sorry venting ...

[vaf]

Carlie, did you file the original claim in 1999, or did you file the appeal with the Board in 1999? For a $50 fee and filing a brief writ of mandamus request which several of us can help you with, you may be able to speed things up. I can send you the template for the writ we filed in April. Although denied as moot, the writ accomplished its goal, which was to force the VA to make a decision (which was why the writ became moot), which we could either accept or appeal to the Court. You can of course seek legal counsel if you then appeal any denial to the Court.

8/1994 - filed appeal to Board

3/2001 - remand to VARO

6/2003 - remanded again to VARO

10/2005 - remanded to AMC

4/2008 - AMC sends appeal back to VARO

4/2008 - We file request for Writ of Mandamus

11/2008 - Writ denied as moot because AMC issues denial recommendation to Board

11/2008 - We file NOD to AMC and Board

We haven't heard anything yet, but have asked for Congressional intervention in getting a decision rendered. If we receive nothing by November 2009, we'll file another writ request.

[Pete53]

((((( Carlie )))))

VAF thanks I think that Mandamus shows VA that you are not a doormat and serious

[carlie]

vaf and Pete53,

The AMC just remanded it to my VARO March 2009.

carlie

[john999]

If you file one new piece of evidence the VA will base their effective date on that evidence and wipe out 10 years of backpay. Ten years for a claim to be rated and appealed all the way is a crime. It took me about 25 years to go from 10% to 30% and another 10 years to go to 70%, and two more years to get IU. One more year to get P&T. 3 more years to get correct ratings on agent orange claims. That is 38 years of dealing with these VA clowns. I have a CUE claim that is about two years old.

[vaf]

Carlie, it's your decision of course, but if you IRIS your VARO and get the usual vague, "we have no idea how long it will take to give you a decison" response, you may want to consider filing a writ request. You've been more than reasonable and patient with this appeal. The writ will force the VA to document to the Court why the delay is not "arbitrary and capricious."

Your supplying a timeline and history of this appeal would be a valuable part of the writ request, showing that you've been subjected to unreasonable delay. You can't get attorney representation for this appeal until it reaches the Court, either, because you filed an initial NOD prior to June 2007. So that would mean that you've exhausted your options under the old system, and therefore seek relief through a writ request.

The Court is loathe to involve itself with a claim, but the benefit to you is that the Court will shine a spotlight on the appeal and monitor its progress, at least until you get a decision that you either accept or appeal to the Court. At least you'd get the matter wrenched out of the hands of your VARO.

[john999]

VAF

I did not know that you must have filed the "initial" NOD before June 2007. You are saying that any existing claim before 2007 on which prior NODs were filed are dead to lawyers at BVA or RO. I thought that if you got a NOD after June 2007 even on existing or old claims you could hire a lawyer. Can you point out that regulation and give us the wording. I believe you. but I just want to see it if you don't mind.

[vaf]

If you filed an initial NOD at the VARO prior to June 2007, you could hire a lawyer to represent you at that level only if that lawyer was willing to accept no more than $10 to represent you (or represented you at no charge). If your appeal reached the Court, that was a different story. This was a leftover law from the Civil War Era, which Congress subsequently changed, but did not grandfather.

After June 2007 (I think it's the 20th or 21st of June 2007), the veteran can get legal representation after the first NOD at the VARO.

Someone chime in and correct me if I'm wrong, but that's my understanding.

[Shark]

He is correct, if you filed a NOD before June 21, 2007 you cannot get an attorney to represent you until you go past BVA I believe. Here is the regulation http://www.govtrack.us/congress/billtext.xpd?bill=s109-3421

[carlie]

vaf,

Thanks for the info.

I got notice from BVA about 6 weeks ago that my BVA Judge has retired

and I am entitled to have ANOTHER BVA Hearing with the Judge that is now

appointed to my claim.

Is that an extra kick in the pant's or what .... lol

carlie

[Notorious Kelly]

time to quit being patient losing at their game and TAKE IT TO THE STREETS!!!

[carlie]

Kelly,

VA already has me on record as,

"stalking ENT physician with a loaded weapon on Federal property".

carlie

[vaf]

He is correct, if you filed a NOD before June 21, 2007 you cannot get an attorney to represent you until you go past BVA I believe. Here is the regulation http://www.govtrack.us/congress/billtext.xpd?bill=s109-3421

Let me clarify something, because we're in this situation ourselves at the moment. Say you filed an NOD at the VARO level prior to June 21, 2007, and your appeal then went to the Board and was subsequently denied. You could not engage the services of an attorney unless they were willing to accept no more than $10 for their services. However, say you then decided to appeal the Board denial to the Court of Appeals for Veterans Claims. You were then allowed to get an attorney to represent you. Then, say you "won" your Court appeal, which is almost always a remand back to the Board for proper development of the appeal (it's not an outright granting of your claim). The lawyer you secured for your Court appeal can continue to represent you at the Board level, also if the Board sends that remand back to the VARO to develop. You do not surrender your access to your attorney's services if that appeal has been reviewed by the Court, regardless of what happens afterwards.

That's how we ended up with several of our appeals handled by an attorney, and others handled on our own. Also, our experience has been that if you use a VSO for some claims, and an attorney for others, your VSO organization will more than likely disown you. We got used to handling my husband's claims on our own a long time ago.

[vaf]

vaf,

Thanks for the info.

I got notice from BVA about 6 weeks ago that my BVA Judge has retired

and I am entitled to have ANOTHER BVA Hearing with the Judge that is now

appointed to my claim.

Is that an extra kick in the pant's or what .... lol

carlie

Well, it can work both for you and against you. For you if you have additional evidence or legal citations that support your appeal that you didn't previously provide. Against you depending on how long it will take for your appeal to go before the new Judge the second time around. If it's another 18 months to two years, I'd say the heck with that, file the writ request.

Which way are you leaning, Carlie, do you want a new Board hearing?