Personal Hearing?

[Jayg]

This is kind of a run on to an earlier topic I posted but I am looking for opinions on some advice I received after it was well started.

Here's a much shortened version of that earlier topic...

"After the usual long wait, back in March I finally get a DRO exam. Since then, my DRO got transferred to another area. Here's the kicker. The DRO who saw me, listened to my arguments and had some input from me? Yeah, well forget it. I found out that my file is back with the "appeals development team."

More than a year's waiting, counting the wait for the DRO hearing, just flushed away.

RIGHT... BACK... TO... SQUARE,... BLOODY... ONE!!!

I have been writing Jim Strickland on this and today he advised me:

"You have the right to request a personal hearing. Were I you I would

exercise that right. Write a letter, using certified mail, and make it

clean and simple, "I request a personal hearing to review issues

related to my claim." Don't muck it all up with reasons and

statements. There will be time for that at a personal hearing.

Don't request a DRO hearing. Keep this as generic and clean as

possible. If you aren't given a reasonably prompt hearing you have

created a magnificent point of appeal.

When you have the hearing is the time to iron it all out and find out

just what's cooking."

I have great respect for Jim's knowledge but a second opinion never hurt and there's a great deal of knowledge from varied and many experiences.

So tell me what you think, (besides "Do it!")

Thanks all.

[darkhorse]

I agree, a local level hearing will give you an "EXTRA" chance at proving your case before it goes to the BVA level. You will go before either a DRO or general hearing officer. The DRO may have a difference of opinion and has the authority to reverse the rating boards decision. You may also testify at the hearing but it isn't advisable.

DH

Jayg,

As other's have said - request a hearing, keep the request simple.

Even getting one will take time though, I'd say a start of 6 months waiting for it,

but that will also depend on what VARO you're in.

jmho,

carlie

[Jayg]

Thanks all! :D A formal hearing it is then!

The DRO may have a difference of opinion and has the authority to reverse the rating boards decision. You may also testify at the hearing but it isn't advisable.

B)

I thought being able to tell them what's going on was the main purpose of the hearing--- to 'hear' what you had to say?

[darkhorse]

My reasoning on this is if your case is already strong and you testify at the hearing this may give the decision maker with an opportunity to question you and elicit testimony that may decrease chances of winning the claim. If your case isn't strong then testimony may be helpful.

Testimony can give the DRO or hearing officer a reason to make a judgment about the credibility of the claimant.

The best testimony can come from a witness such as a private physician that has reviewed your records or a physician that has seen you on a regular basis. This makes the testimony more probative and you don't have to risk testifying and the DRO using the testimony against you.

dh

Thanks all! :D A formal hearing it is then!

B)

I thought being able to tell them what's going on was the main purpose of the hearing--- to 'hear' what you had to say?

Edited September 19, 2009 by darkhorse

[john999]

I would squeeze everything out of the VARO before I went to the BVA. Normally, anything you get at the BVA you can get at the VARO. If it involves 40 years of retro then the VARO might just deny it and let you take it upstairs.

I see nothing wrong with testifying at your own DRO hearing. I brought my wife and she testifed about my disability. If you have the evidence what the hearing is doing is putting a face on your claim. I think it also shows that you are committed to the claim. I think evidence is the key, but showing your face can tip it in your favor. I get the feeling that my VARO wants to solve claims at the local level if you push them. Claims with decades of retro are different. Nobody wants to go out on a limb and grant that claim without lots of cover.