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

[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?