I Think Va Wants To Make A Deal? Hold It!

[Jayg]

_{^{Hi all.}}

_{^{I carry TVC, Texas Veterans Commission as my Veteran Service Organization. Jim Strickland calls them one of the better ones. I called them to check the status of my appeal which they told had received a grant with which I should be, not just "pleased, but "very pleased." So much so with what was granted, that I should want or be willing to drop certain parts of mt claim. From my perspective, the only thing that will do that for me is an increase to minimum of 70% and IU but I didn't say that to the guy. Anyway, its been the old waiting game again.}}

_{^{Being onn pins & needles, tenter hooks, take your pick, I called TVC today to check on the progress. (the 800 # doesn't even know a grant has been made) The fellow looks and says hold up. They, TVC, have my file. It was sent to them but he couldn't say why. My regular contact there (who was in hearing earlier) was going to lunch by then but said he wouldcall me afterwards... OHH--Kay!}}

_{^{It was much later but he actually did call back. They wanted a counselor to talk to me about accepting what they have approved while dropping the rest. If theyhave granted the IU, with at least 70% s/c, I will be fine with that.}}

_^B~U~T~!

_{^{I DO NOT want to lock myself out of anything I may need to pursue later. What I would like to know is what specific action, what wording, will leave me the option of reopening a condition, either named in my present claims or as something new, later on.}}

_{^{Help me CMA here,}}

_{^{pul-l-eeze!??}}

Edited October 16, 2009 by Jayg

[vaf]

I would never drop a claim involving a condition that had the potential of causing my death. Period.

[Jayg]

IU is a ball and chain when you are young. If there is any chance of being rehabilitated when you are a young person then I would try that. It would be OK to get IU and then go through some kind of rehab with the idea that when you finish and are able to work. The trouble is that you have to give up the government check, and that is hard to do if you come to depend on it. If I had gotten 100% when I first got out of the army I am sure I would have lost it when I went back to school. The school thing is a gamble, but the 100% is a sure thing. They put you in a bad place. I don't think the VA encourages you to help yourself. To them you are either unemployable or you are employable. It took me years to really become employable with no thanks to the VA.

I'm in my mid-fifties and with a bad back coupled with feet problems and what my records refer to as "severe debilitating arthritis" (though the C&P said mild), and heavily. I barely made it though high school and have no higher education. My medication causes me to doze off frequently. My skills are in construction, truck driving and industrial manufacturing.

I am not too likely to reenter the work force any time soon.

Edited October 17, 2009 by Jayg

[JamesBreckenridge]

Substantial awards up to some amount are signed off on by the Service Center Manager, and higher awards have to go to Central Office in D.C. I routinely send such ratings to the VSCM and/or VACO. This is to guard against fraud by VA employees (making up veterans and cashing in on the account) and to protect the taxpayer.

A VSCM doesn't have TIME to fight the evaluation I assign. They might not even have the background in the rating job. They're managers. I would hate to have their job. I doubt they're going to be able to quote book chapter and verse of the rating schedule/CFR what they think is wrong with the rating. "It seems too high," isn't good enough.

Hang in there, JayQ.

[broncovet]

James..

The courts have recently ruled that is illegal. The Va cant have a set of checks and balances ONLY for Veterans with big claims. It would be ok if they audited a random 10% or so, but to audit only the big claims has been declared illegal. Remember large retros are usually the result of many, many, many years of delay. A $250k retro is usually a claim delayed MORE THAN 10 years. I think that a Veteran whose claim has been delayed 10 years, doesnt deserve any more delays sending it to Dc.

I personally think there should not be $250k retros, because there should be no excuse for delaying a Veterans claim more than 2 years, let alone 10 years. I think if the VA cant deny the claim or approve it in 2 years, it should be automatically approved.

If you order a credit report and protest something on your credit report, the 30 day clock starts ticking. The credit bureau has to verify it in 30 days or must remove it. Same with the VA. Veterans have a one year time limit on appeals, so why does the VA not have a time limit on claims? There is no excuse for a 10 year old claim.

I really dont think just checking large retros helps stops fraud..it just means that employee frauds will go "under the wire". In other words if they only check em at $250 k retro, then the frauds will do $235k retros. If they only check $100 k retros, then crooks will do several $80k retros.

If you really want, I will show you the court case where they cant do that anymore.

[Jayg]

James..

The courts have recently ruled that is illegal. The Va cant have a set of checks and balances ONLY for Veterans with big claims. It would be ok if they audited a random 10% or so, but to audit only the big claims has been declared illegal. Remember large retros are usually the result of many, many, many years of delay. A $250k retro is usually a claim delayed MORE THAN 10 years. I think that a Veteran whose claim has been delayed 10 years, doesnt deserve any more delays sending it to Dc.

I personally think there should not be $250k retros, because there should be no excuse for delaying a Veterans claim more than 2 years, let alone 10 years. I think if the VA cant deny the claim or approve it in 2 years, it should be automatically approved.

If you order a credit report and protest something on your credit report, the 30 day clock starts ticking. The credit bureau has to verify it in 30 days or must remove it. Same with the VA. Veterans have a one year time limit on appeals, so why does the VA not have a time limit on claims? There is no excuse for a 10 year old claim.

I really don'good right ow, mindt think just checking large retros helps stops fraud..it just means that employee frauds will go "under the wire". In other words if they only check em at $250 k retro, then the frauds will do $235k retros. If they only check $100 k retros, then crooks will do several $80k retros.

If you really want, I will show you the court case where they can't do that anymore.

Yes, please. I would like to have a copy of that. No good right now since they've already done. But maybe I can coax them to quit fooling around. I would appreciate it, thank you. Edited October 18, 2009 by Jayg

[JamesBreckenridge]

Oh, a certain percentage of ALL of our claims are pulled for review at random anyway. It is NOT only the big retros that get checked.

They're just trying to catch BIG mistakes is all. An erroneous grant of 0 percent is no big deal. An erroneous grant of a quarter million dollar retro payment is a pretty big deal.

Every big retro decision that I've ever done has been rock solid. I've never gotten one returned to me. And I always flash them as high priority, high dollar, long delayed claims. Remember that getting a claim that's two or three years old off our books is GOOD for us. Having two or three year old claims in our inventory hurts our Average Days Pending numbers. They want these claims decided one way or the other and fast. My Service Center Manager isn't going to have time to take my rating apart looking for errors just to deny a claim.

Truth be told, I think Management bonuses have more to do with how fast we get the claims rated and the quality percentages (our local quality manager randomly samples our cases as well as the National Quality Team). I promise I have NEVER heard of a criteria of "keeping costs down" or "protecting taxpayer money" when it comes to either bonuses or our goals. One of our mottos is even "Grant if you can, deny if you must."

It only makes sense to review big retro payments. It shouldn't take too long. The rating is supposed to explain the basis for the decision, and a brief procedural history of the claim that led up to such a large retro payment. It should be obvious to the station management as well as central office what's going on. Given the length of the claims process and the size of some of these retros, a few extra days for review makes sense.

If there is a court case that says otherwise, I'm all ears.