Do You Have A Va Horror Story?

[Cruinthe]

My story is over at vawatchdog due to my VARO sending me a VCAA regarding a "menstrual disorder". I am male, and I am service-connected for prostatitis.

The Fox news editor asked me if I know of anyone else with VA horror stories. Now is our time to stand up and be counted, people.

Mail me glennmcbride@gmail.com for more info.

[jbasser]

A lot of folks call it baffonery. I call it a carefully coreograph scripted production. No one can be that stupid, not even Forrest Gump. We have some members here who if they would comne forward would make you sit back and flat cry like a baby. In my 10 + years at Hadit, I have seen thousands of claims and have witnessed some amazing denials. Many of these folks waited years to get rated as we all watched each episode of their claims.

I am not surprised as the answers we get from the RO. The craziest one I have heard is a Vet was sent a SSOC stating he was deceased, yet he is still alive today.

J

[broncovet]

I think there are plenty of horror stories, but since most Veterans are aware of the VA's "ability to retaliate" on Veteran's, they arent talking. The VA can deny, reduce, delay or even shred Veterans claims, and the Veteran simply has no recourse, as it would appear that VA employees are "exempt" from prosecution. Consider the Cleveland RO manager. The Cleveland RO is one of the worst in the country to Veterans, and also one of the worst at shredding evidence. So, what happens to that manager? She was promoted to the VA Central Office.

Sources:

http://blog.cleveland.com/openers/2008/04/...k_vasil_of.html

http://www.vawatchdog.org/08/nf08/nfdec08/nf120408-1.htm

[hedgey]

I think there are plenty of horror stories, but since most Veterans are aware of the VA's "ability to retaliate" on Veteran's, they arent talking. The VA can deny, reduce, delay or even shred Veterans claims, and the Veteran simply has no recourse....

I think broncovet hit the nail on the head here. It's too bad, because getting the truth out into the light would likely be the best hope of change, but who can risk losing what they've fought so hard for?

If we could dare, if we could be sure the VA could never flag us as 'troublesome', there would be thousands and thousands of voices. But instead we're forced to stay silent, speaking up only in places like this web board.

Edited to add: I wonder if the opposite is also true, and if going on the news and singing the praises of the VA would get a veteran flagged as a 'good doobie' and grease the wheels for them?

Edited April 7, 2010 by hedgey

[Cruinthe]

I doubt it. Since this whole kerfuffle started, the VA has ignored my request for fibromyalgia and IBS, and it attempting to lower my rating for Chronic Prostatitis that I have had since 1993. No good deed goes unpunished.

I am willing to make this sacrifice, though, even if it costs me some of percentages. Time will tell.

[hulamatt]

My story is over at vawatchdog due to my VARO sending me a VCAA regarding a "menstrual disorder". I am male, and I am service-connected for prostatitis.

The Fox news editor asked me if I know of anyone else with VA horror stories. Now is our time to stand up and be counted, people.

Mail me glennmcbride@gmail.com for more info.

VA said i was married never was, but claimed they had my marriage certificate, then told me they didn't recieve my records, when the other ones in the same envelope were there...asked to see my c file, they said no

[carlie]

In my opinion, many times the old saying,

"the squeaky wheel gets the grease" holds true.

I fail to see anyway that VBA claimants are

"forced to stay silent, speaking up only in places like this web board".

The VA is actually the ones that taught me to speak up.

There is a 38 CFR reg that offers us protection from retaliation of decision makers

and all VA employees.

I would not hesitate to provide a copy of this to ANY VA employee that wanted to give vets a

difficult time for speaking up.

jmho,

carlie

§ 4.23 Attitude of rating officers.

It is to be remembered that the majority of applicants are disabled persons who are seeking benefits of law to which they believe themselves entitled.

In the exercise of his or her functions, rating officers must not allow their personal feelings to intrude; an antagonistic, critical, or even abusive attitude

on the part of a claimant should not in any instance influence the officers in the handling of the case.

Fairness and courtesy must at all times be shown to applicants by all employees whose duties bring them in contact, directly or indirectly, with the Depart- ment’s claimants.

[41 FR 11292, Mar. 18, 1976]