Jump to content

Ask Your VA Claims Questions | Read Current Posts 
Read VA Disability Claims Articles
Search | View All Forums | Donate | Blogs | New Users | Rules 

  • tbirds-va-claims-struggle (1).png

  • 01-2024-stay-online-donate-banner.png

     

  • 0

I Think Vets Could Sue

Rate this question


Berta

Question

http://www.usdoj.gov/04foia/1974condis.htm

OVERVIEW OF THE PRIVACY ACT OF 1974, 2004 EDITION

CONDITIONS OF DISCLOSURE TO THIRD PARTIES

A. The "No Disclosure Without Consent" Rule

"No agency shall disclose any record which is contained in a system of records by any means of communication to any person, or to another agency, except pursuant to a written request by, or with the prior written consent of, the individual to whom the record pertains [subject to 12 exceptions]." 5 U.S.C. § 552a(:mellow:.

In my opinion- the VA has "disclosed" private records of veterans by virtue of this employee who took the records home, "to any person" ,"agency" -ie: a bunch of thieves.

The VA is ultimately responsible for this.

GRADUATE ! Nov 2nd 2007 American Military University !

When thousands of Americans faced annihilation in the 1800s Chief

Osceola's response to his people, the Seminoles, was

simply "They(the US Army)have guns, but so do we."

Sameo to us -They (VA) have 38 CFR ,38 USC, and M21-1- but so do we.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Answers 5
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters For This Question

Top Posters For This Question

5 answers to this question

Recommended Posts

Does anyone know whose information was part of the theft? They say 26+ million, then the next report says only veterans discharged after 1975. And yet another report from another forum said it was only veterans discharged before 1977.

Here's another reason to be baffled. I'm posting a press release from a government site about a different matter, and you can see they refer to "All 24 million living veterans..." Does that mean spouses make up the other 2+ million?

I agree, I think veterans can sue for this violation of the federal privacy act. I am angry! I have just spent THREE YEARS trying to get something off my credit report that was due to wrongfully disclosed private information. The manager at a new bank said we could "own" Bank of America for their violation of our privacy when they disclosed our name, address, and SSN to an outsider. This outsider was merged with our account in error and he later filed bankruptcy. Computerized credit scoring doesn't care how errors get there, it still rates the negative and that can cost a lot when interest rates are determined by the credit score.

VA officials are trying to paint this a "breach of security" matter, but for each veteran and spouse involved, it is a violation of privacy and that is a totally different matter. You may have noticed that Homeland Security is now involved.

Another thing that irks me is how quicky the credit bureaus jumped on selling the programs for watching our credit files. Wasn't it just so nice that they changed their Web site to blast the message of a 50% discount! Don't you know they WISH all 26 million veterans take them up on the offer! I think adding the fraud alert will work just as well.

CRAIG - GRAHAM LEGISLATION SEEKS TO REPEAL CIVIL WAR ERA PROHIBITION ON LAWYERS

The Craig - Graham legislation seeks to balance the scales of justice for veterans by allowing them to hire a lawyer -- if they so choose

May 4, 2006

Media contact for Sen. Craig: Jeff Schrade (202) 224-9093

Media contact for Sen. Graham: Wes Hickman (202) 224-5972

(Washington, DC) A bill which would allow veterans to hire lawyers to represent them in their efforts to obtain federal benefits from the U.S. Department of Veterans Affairs has been introduced by U.S. Senators Larry Craig (R-Idaho) and Lindsey Graham (R-South Carolina).

The legislation (S. 2694 - the Veterans’ Choice of Representation Act of 2006), if enacted, would repeal restrictions flowing from a policy born nearly 150 years ago when attending law school was not required to become a lawyer and many practicing law were considered ill trained and unscrupulous.

"I suppose that some would still warn that lawyers are not to be trusted, but the reality is that the laws are complex and I want veterans to have the option of hiring an attorney to help navigate the system, if they choose," said Sen. Craig, who chairs the Senate Committee on Veterans’ Affairs. "A recent editorial put it this way, ‘If American soldiers are mature and responsible enough to choose to risk their lives for their country, shouldn’t they be considered competent to hire a lawyer?’ I believe the obvious answer to that question is ‘yes,’ Simply put, the current paternalistic restriction is outdated."

Under current law, all 24 million living veterans are prohibited from hiring a lawyer to help them navigate the Veterans Affairs system. It is only after a veteran has spent months and even years exhausting the extensive VA administrative process that the veteran then may retain counsel – a process that often takes 3 or more years to complete.

"This overdue change will significantly improve veterans’ access to the VA and expedite just outcomes," said Sen. Graham, who also serves on the Senate Veterans’ Affairs Committee. "In today’s complicated world, legal assistance in navigating the system is more timely than ever. I thank Chairman Craig for his leadership in this effort."

Under the current appeals system, about 85 percent of veterans choose to be represented by Veterans’ Service Organizations or state veterans agency personnel.

"I want to be clear that I am not suggesting that attorneys should be considered necessary in order to obtain VA benefits," Chairman Craig said.

"We must ensure that the system continues to serve veterans in a friendly, non-adversarial manner – regardless of the presence of an attorney or any other representative. I also want to be clear that, although I believe veterans should have the option to hire attorneys, they should not be discouraged in any way from utilizing the valuable free services now provided by many dedicated representatives of veterans’ service organizations."

####

Link to comment
Share on other sites

AtEase- Welcome aboard-

The math didnt add up to me either-

One of the pages at the VA web site says there are 24,5 million vets-now there are 2 million more?

It could be the widows.

I think this involves ALL vets and all widows of vets-to include Pres. Bush, Sec. Nicholson, Senator Dole, Ollie North- etc-etc

I agree with everything you said- I too noticed how companies got right on the bandwagon to help a vet secure their credit-

A Hawaii newspaper said there had been one break in the same week in this area where the VA employee lived, but nothing was taken. A neighbor was quoted saying the guy said the discs were well hidden-

it all seems real funny to me-

VA should pay for any cost a vet incurs protecting their credit-

I also believe that a veteran who is denied a claim because their probative evidence is not addressed-

should -in their NOD-ask the VA in the NOD if an employee took their evidence home and it was stolen.

And if their evidence is not addressed by the VARO by -(give them a dated deadline) they want their missing evidence to be reported to the FBI.

Sounds nuts I know- but it makes me sick to think of all the incompetence we have dealt with as VA claimants and this fiasco is probably one of many we and the public have never found out about.

GRADUATE ! Nov 2nd 2007 American Military University !

When thousands of Americans faced annihilation in the 1800s Chief

Osceola's response to his people, the Seminoles, was

simply "They(the US Army)have guns, but so do we."

Sameo to us -They (VA) have 38 CFR ,38 USC, and M21-1- but so do we.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The VA has already taken steps to protect me from credit fraud.

By illegally denying my claim for years while we lost most of our possesions (sold for food and heat) we were forced to file bancruptcy.

I don't have any credit to take advantage of any more. A criminal act involving my credit would not be very profitable. Maybe cause an inconvenience.

Any way, just thought I'd lighten things up a bit with some humor.

Time

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I listened to the segment they had on C-Span this morning at 9:00 EST. Sounds to me like the veterans are basically on their own. Also, the guy who took the files seems to have committed a breach of a VA regulation, he didn't necessarily break the law. HA HA If you or I would have done something like this, we would be under the jail. They quote him as being a long time employee, very upstanding, very smart and someone who would never do something that was wrong. Yeah, we believe that. How many high ranking officials within the government lately have been involved in law breaking activities who most people would have stated the same facts about them.

mssoup1

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.


  • Tell a friend

    Love HadIt.com’s VA Disability Community Vets helping Vets since 1997? Tell a friend!
  • Recent Achievements

    • spazbototto earned a badge
      Week One Done
    • Paul Gretza earned a badge
      Week One Done
    • Troy Spurlock went up a rank
      Community Regular
    • KMac1181 earned a badge
      Week One Done
    • jERRYMCK earned a badge
      Week One Done
  • Our picks

    • I met with a VSO today at my VA Hospital who was very knowledgeable and very helpful.  We decided I should submit a few new claims which we did.  He told me that he didn't need copies of my military records that showed my sick call notations related to any of the claims.  He said that the VA now has entire military medical record on file and would find the record(s) in their own file.  It seemed odd to me as my service dates back to  1981 and spans 34 years through my retirement in 2015.  It sure seemed to make more sense for me to give him copies of my military medical record pages that document the injuries as I'd already had them with me.  He didn't want my copies.  Anyone have any information on this.  Much thanks in advance.  
      • 4 replies
    • Caluza Triangle defines what is necessary for service connection
      Caluza Triangle – Caluza vs Brown defined what is necessary for service connection. See COVA– CALUZA V. BROWN–TOTAL RECALL

      This has to be MEDICALLY Documented in your records:

      Current Diagnosis.   (No diagnosis, no Service Connection.)

      In-Service Event or Aggravation.
      Nexus (link- cause and effect- connection) or Doctor’s Statement close to: “The Veteran’s (current diagnosis) is at least as likely due to x Event in military service”
      • 0 replies
    • Do the sct codes help or hurt my disability rating 
    • VA has gotten away with (mis) interpreting their  ambigious, , vague regulations, then enforcing them willy nilly never in Veterans favor.  

      They justify all this to congress by calling themselves a "pro claimant Veteran friendly organization" who grants the benefit of the doubt to Veterans.  

      This is not true, 

      Proof:  

          About 80-90 percent of Veterans are initially denied by VA, pushing us into a massive backlog of appeals, or worse, sending impoverished Veterans "to the homeless streets" because  when they cant work, they can not keep their home.  I was one of those Veterans who they denied for a bogus reason:  "Its been too long since military service".  This is bogus because its not one of the criteria for service connection, but simply made up by VA.  And, I was a homeless Vet, albeit a short time,  mostly due to the kindness of strangers and friends. 

          Hadit would not be necessary if, indeed, VA gave Veterans the benefit of the doubt, and processed our claims efficiently and paid us promptly.  The VA is broken. 

          A huge percentage (nearly 100 percent) of Veterans who do get 100 percent, do so only after lengthy appeals.  I have answered questions for thousands of Veterans, and can only name ONE person who got their benefits correct on the first Regional Office decision.  All of the rest of us pretty much had lengthy frustrating appeals, mostly having to appeal multiple multiple times like I did. 

          I wish I know how VA gets away with lying to congress about how "VA is a claimant friendly system, where the Veteran is given the benefit of the doubt".   Then how come so many Veterans are homeless, and how come 22 Veterans take their life each day?  Va likes to blame the Veterans, not their system.   
    • Welcome to hadit!  

          There are certain rules about community care reimbursement, and I have no idea if you met them or not.  Try reading this:

      https://www.va.gov/resources/getting-emergency-care-at-non-va-facilities/

         However, (and I have no idea of knowing whether or not you would likely succeed) Im unsure of why you seem to be so adamant against getting an increase in disability compensation.  

         When I buy stuff, say at Kroger, or pay bills, I have never had anyone say, "Wait!  Is this money from disability compensation, or did you earn it working at a regular job?"  Not once.  Thus, if you did get an increase, likely you would have no trouble paying this with the increase compensation.  

          However, there are many false rumors out there that suggest if you apply for an increase, the VA will reduce your benefits instead.  

      That rumor is false but I do hear people tell Veterans that a lot.  There are strict rules VA has to reduce you and, NOT ONE of those rules have anything to do with applying for an increase.  

      Yes, the VA can reduce your benefits, but generally only when your condition has "actually improved" under ordinary conditions of life.  

          Unless you contacted the VA within 72 hours of your medical treatment, you may not be eligible for reimbursement, or at least that is how I read the link, I posted above. Here are SOME of the rules the VA must comply with in order to reduce your compensation benefits:

      https://www.law.cornell.edu/cfr/text/38/3.344

       
×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

Guidelines and Terms of Use