Court Of Appeals Rules In Favor Of Veteran - New Legal Precedent

[Troy Spurlock]

From the ruling, and I believe this says it all (which is what veterans have been arguing all along):

Veteran's disability benefits are nondiscretionary, statutorily mandated benefits. A veteran is entitled to disability benefits upon a showing that he meets the eligibility requirements set forth in the governing statutes and regulations. We conclude that such entitlement to benefits is a property interest protected by the Due Process Clause of the Fifth Amendment to the United States Constitution.

Sometimes it takes years to win a claim, but as proven here it is well worth it to continue that fight and never give up, never surrender to the incompetence and gross misanagement of disability claims by the VA Benefits Administration.

[Troy Spurlock]

I can't get the interview url to load.

Google my name "Troy Spurlock" and Willamettelive and it should come up as the first hit.

[Pete53]

http://willamettelive.com/story/Soldiers_r...with_VA121.html

[Berta]

I think if we dont use it -we will lose it-

meaning we need to cite this case every single time the VA denies us our basic rights.

We have the right to have our evidence proper considered and not ignored-particularily when we claimants spend thousands of dollars for IMOs only to have the ROs completely ignored (or trash) them.

The VCAA needs an amendment- the amendment I wrote and sent to Congressman Filner went no where-

upon receipt of a defective VCAA letter- the veteran or their rep should have the right to question it and ask that a cproper and compliant VCAA letter be prepared.

This is one of our basic rights- but when they send a piss poor VCAA letter ( as I got and my reps said it was compliant with the law but I proved it wasn't)the claimant MUST take them to task and certainly make this their first argument in the formal I-9-and charge them with non compliance with established VA case law and regulations- specifically the VCAA et al.

The so called C & P "Experts" often dont hacve a single clue on the disabilitiy they are C & Ping-as you said.

This is a violation of our basic rights too- and the most serious one in my opinion-as even if we rebutt a faulty C & P with medical evidence that would lead to overrule to examiner's conclusion- we are told we are not 'competent enough' to provide lay medical testimony or opinions even when the results of this evidence is prime facie evidence that supports te claim.

My award letter was faulty - the BVA awarded me in April and within 13 days the RO messed up the award and the statements of the BVA.

Since then I have had 3 or 4 letters from both Cong. Filner and Chairman Terry that I didnt acknowledge because I was hoping to thank them for VA's finally resolving my claim.

That didnt happen- it went from a supervisor to a DRO 2 weeks ago but I decided to reply to them with copy of this faulty award letter-

the letter's wording was either the fast and careless work of an untrained RO employee or a deliberate and outrageous attempt by VA to prevent me from obtaining about $92,000 they owe me.

Pending the response I get from the RO on my last letter to them I will try to incorporate this decision into my next statements to Cong Filner and Chair Terry- or better yet-maybe just ask the subcommittee to include this in one of their hearings.

To me a falsified document as within the recent CAVC case is as equally serious as the many other ways VA deliberately manipulates the evidence.

When a VA examiner opines incorrectly on a disability- (which is often totally overruled when the vets gets an IMO from a real doctor) this-in my opinion-borders on malpractice in many cases- as if they are not properly diagnosing the extent of a disability -for example- for a higher rating- how in the heck can they diagnose a vet in a clinical setting?

I could gripe all day------

I await a new PC- my PC man was out of the country and then came back to overwhelming other things and he has it almost ready to bring over and set up-

I cant use my Word program or 3 1/2 so I am on a hiatus and cant raise more Hell with VA until my new PC is here.

Last letters I sent to COngressman Filner and VA were done on a typewriter and it is awful-I forgot how to use it and they smply dont look as good as Word docs do.

[Commander Bob]

IMHO. The new C&P exam and the DRO review will just delay the denial letter the vet will get,sometime in the distant future. I do not know of a test that can actually show the dioxin level in one's system. I too have a claim for AO with acne proof from the army that dates way back to 1968. Of course, I got denied. Here is an interesting link. http://www.geocities.com/Pentagon/Bunker/8212/briefD2.html ( Para 4 is notable ).

Edited August 16, 2009 by Commander Bob 92-93

[Commander Bob]

It was the second time I was interviewed about the problems with the VA claims process...the first being here: http://willamettelive.com/story/Soldiers_r...with_VA121.html

Again, thank you...all of you and your continued service and support of veterans with your website and forum. Glad to be a part of it...hope I can do some good here.

T.S.

Thank you for all the help and support to our fellow vets, Troy.

I read your newspaper interview. You did well. However, the VA rep. shoveled out the "Same Old Stuff". First, the fire in the NRC destroyed mostly WWII records. I could go on and on. Your local newspaper is being played like a fiddle by the VA

Edited August 16, 2009 by Commander Bob 92-93

[john999]

Yes, Bob, and the fire in St. Louis destroyed mostly Army records from WWII. The VA claimed my father-in-laws records were destroyed and he was a Marine. I think they lied because they were too lazy to look for his records. They also claim my father's records were destroyed except I have them.