Jump to content
VA Disability Community via Hadit.com

VA Disability Claims Articles

Ask Your VA Claims Question | Current Forum Posts Search | Rules | View All Forums
VA Disability Articles | Chats and Other Events | Donate | Blogs | New Users

  • hohomepage-banner-2024-2.png

  • 27-year-anniversary-leaderboard.png

    advice-disclaimer.jpg

  • donate-be-a-hero.png

  • 0

Perfected Ftca


sweeper68

Question

I filed a letter of complaint to BVAMC after suffering a heart attack and residual damage due to their (BVAMC) not addressing the diagnosis and complaint (non treament of a known condition for 3 years ). Instead of filing a complaint claiming an amount certain the VSO told me I could write a letter of complaint to the hospital but not to enter an amount for damages ! Of course they never replied to my letter.And I filed an 1151 within the 2years of my heart attack. It was denied after 4 years in the merry go round called adjudication. But strangely enough they awarded a 100% rating for heart shortly after learning where I was going with my complaint.. I did not even submit a claim for the heart ! anyway I filed an sf 95 (registered mail )shortly afterward and it got lost after waiting for a reply for 2 years and was told to submit a new one !! Yes! the ride is just beginning! I submitted a new claim( copy of original ) ,this time time they admitted reciept of the claim.I know the FTCA law stating you must notify the offending agency for a claim to be valid, so the question IS. do I stand on solid ground as far as procedure goes? My POA is the American Legion and my opinion of them is lower than a snakes belly ! Anyone with knowledge that could assist me would appreciated.. Sweeper 68 Vietnam Vet 67-68 Central Highlands

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Answers 43
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters For This Question

Recommended Posts

They are very rigid on the 2 year Statute of Limits-

The SF 95 must be filed within 2 years of knowledge of the malpractice.

Your proof of mailing the original SF 95 might be needed to prove you were within the statute.

SF 95 should be filed with the Regional or District COunsel for VA c/o the VARO you deal with and also send a copy to the OGC in DC.

The amount should NEVER be left blank and the amount must be totally at the bottom of the page-

I won simliar FTCA case and Sec 1151 claim.

Heart disease- evidence in ,med recs,but no diagnosis and no care.

This killed my husband.

Although they had a Peer review done within 3 months of the SF 95 filing date that totally agreed with my case-and the VA RC wanted to talk settlement but the report suddenly disappeared (it showed up years later in my C file)

It then took 3 years of going round and round with them and I had no lawyer and no independent medical opinion.

They also ended up admitting to all my malpractice charges but one.

I sure advise getting an IMO to support your FTCA and 1151 claims as well as getting a lawyer for the FTCA.

I did it myself but I had to study cardiology and neurology.

I studied the EKGs and the ECHOs and unfortunately I also had an autopsy to prove the damage they caused.

I laid the malpractice all out step by step with medical evidence and they had no way to go except to settle.

Sec 1151 -no time limit to file and any 1151 comp is offset by any FTCA settlement.It is often best to file both.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I filed a letter of complaint to BVAMC after suffering a heart attack and residual damage due to their (BVAMC) not addressing the diagnosis and complaint (non treament of a known condition for 3 years ). Instead of filing a complaint claiming an amount certain the VSO told me I could write a letter of complaint to the hospital but not to enter an amount for damages ! Of course they never replied to my letter.And I filed an 1151 within the 2years of my heart attack. It was denied after 4 years in the merry go round called adjudication. But strangely enough they awarded a 100% rating for heart shortly after learning where I was going with my complaint.. I did not even submit a claim for the heart ! anyway I filed an sf 95 (registered mail )shortly afterward and it got lost after waiting for a reply for 2 years and was told to submit a new one !! Yes! the ride is just beginning! I submitted a new claim( copy of original ) ,this time time they admitted reciept of the claim.I know the FTCA law stating you must notify the offending agency for a claim to be valid, so the question IS. do I stand on solid ground as far as procedure goes? My POA is the American Legion and my opinion of them is lower than a snakes belly ! Anyone with knowledge that could assist me would appreciated.. Sweeper 68 Vietnam Vet 67-68 Central Highlands
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Hello Berta, I am updating on my recent contact with the VAOIG. The attorney assigned to my case informed me it was still under investigation. She was much more friendly and helpful this time as opposed to her arrogancy the last time I spoke with her ! Anyway they recieved the second mailing of the SF-95 on Aug.1 09 and I had the option of going ahead and filing suit in Federal Court if I so choose. The 6 months will expire in Feb. 2010, so I will wait another few months and see what developes. I have been studying Cardio testing procedures and what test results warrant further testing and blood lipids indicative of cardio problems existing. Also involved in studying procedural law for FTCA claims. I understand some Federal Courts have a program set up for assisting citizens in Pro Se FTCA claims action. I believe I have a solid chance at success considering the med reports stating Abnormal ekg, enlarged heart, coronary insuffiencies on 2 different C&P exams and abnormal blood lipids! Plus the IMO letter from my cardio doctor. I am also in possession of an inter office memo conversation that occured between my Congressional rep.and a review officer discussing discouraging the possibilty of me filing the 1151! And a physicians report (private) that had the diagnosis portion blacked out with a blackbox that had the words "Courtesy " visible. I brought this up in my documented evidence submission and asked for an explanation. Speaking of courtesy have you seen the proposed bill intoduced by Sen, Akaka stating that SC for any new AO disabilties would be effective only to the date that the new presumptive disabilty was officially added to the AO presumptive list? If this so called courtesy bill passes vets will only be rero'ed to the date IHD is added. Sweeper

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Speaking of courtesy have you seen the proposed bill intoduced by Sen, Akaka stating that SC for any new AO disabilties would be effective only to the date that the new presumptive disabilty was officially added to the AO presumptive list? If this so called courtesy bill passes vets will only be rero'ed to the date IHD is added. Sweeper

Sweeper,

Unfortunately that's the way it is and I guess it should be.

After all,how can VA start paying disability benefits for something

that wasn't even on the list of presumptives yet.

I'm just truly glad for claimant's that is in there now.

I know I'm going to get someone ticked off by even posting this,

but I do feel it's true.

jmho,

carlie

Link to comment
Share on other sites

"Speaking of courtesy have you seen the proposed bill intoduced by Sen, Akaka stating that SC for any new AO disabilties would be effective only to the date that the new presumptive disabilty was officially added to the AO presumptive list? If this so called courtesy bill passes vets will only be rero'ed to the date IHD is added. Sweeper"

I would think the retro would have to be to the date of the claim.And if Nehmer kicks in -to the date of any past denied IHD claims-in some cases but not all.

For example my award gave me EED for DIC back to 1994.Nehmer decision.

I have given many other examples here of Nehmer and veterans claims.

If a vet filed for SC IHD tomorrow and they have proven AO exposure and the regs come out dated Feb 1, 2010

I feel the date of the claim would still be the EED under Nehmer.

If a vet filed for IHD in 1997 or a widow raised this in a DIC claim in say 1997 -and they were denied-

then under Nehmer these could potentially be re-opened with EED to the earliest date that IHD showed in the clinical record or the 1997 dates.

Sweeper I fully believe that anyone with a FTCA claim should obtain a lawyer.

When I tried to find one- lawyers were not allowed to advertise their specialities years ago- the 20 lawyers I called in NY could have been real estate lawyers, civil court lawyers , probate lawyers-

I dont know -all I had was a phone book for the Souhtern Tier NY and none of them would even refer me to a malpractrice lawyer and they all told me I would not succeed without even looking at one single piece of my evidence.

This is why I had to do it myself.

If you are confident of your case and have the medical evidence to prove it-in my opinion a lawyer would be the best way to go in the Federal Court system-

I was pro se in a different Federal district court matter-(I sued a NSO from the DAV)

the rules and practices procedures alone take considerable time to understand-

and making service of complaint yourself with or without US Marshall- and meeting the court deadlines in a proper acceptable form of response..... preparing the interrogatories and the discovery and arranging the depositions......................

There are considerable formal technicalities to going Pro Se in Federal Court.Prisoners do it all the time and I got the prisoner's packet of USDC forms for Pro se filings along with the other large packet for about 150 bucks of the NY State court rules.

Maybe your states USDC rules and procedures are now free on the internet.

This new AO reg is going to be screwed around with- you can bet on it- because this new presumptive will cost the VA PLENTY.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Well Carlie here is my take on this. The Agent Orange Review letters I recieve have listed a limited suggestive association of Heart disease and AO for years now! Time is on THEIR side not ours! This releasing of a few AO diseases at a time has been going on for years. When in fact they have had the known effects AO exposure and the medical knowledge in their possession since the 50's. So it's a matter of who knew what and when did they know it! They hid it behind the problem of studying the exposure rates of veterans! Like a little bit of exposure may not be harmful. That's like saying a little bit of cyanide might not harm you!! I just see it as slowly revealing the truth about AO as time goes by and there are fewer of us Vietnam Vets left to worry about.. Sen. Akaka is no friend to vets !! JMO. Sweeper

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

Guidelines and Terms of Use