Reconsideration Vs Nod

[MikeS]

Hi all:

What is the difference between a NOD and a Decision Reconsideration?

Mike S.

[Guest]

John999

I totally agree that it really doesn't matter because in most cases the DRO will just rubber stamp the same decision forcing the claim to go to the BVA especially if there is a good retro payment due.

[Philip Rogers]

carlie - look up "reconsideration" in the VBM. You are correct, everytime the VA receives additional/new evidence they are supposed to consider it and render a subsequent decision.

I have read somewhere that after a claimant receives a decision from the RO,they have two options,

1) submit a NOD

2) submit new evidence for a re-open of the issue/s

I am not in agreement with # 2 above for one reason and I'm sure my thinking could be screwed up

BUT the way I see it is first of all in order to actually re-open a claim issue, the issue would need have

the status of a finally adjudicated claim.

Anyways,

I have not yet found anything showing that reconsideration is limited to only the BVA level.

This topic may end up having some good debate and better understanding.

§ 3.160 Status of claims

© Pending claim.

An application, formal or informal, which has not been finally adjudicated.

(d) Finally adjudicated claim.

An application, formal or informal, which has been allowed or disallowed

by the agency of original jurisdiction, the action having become final by the expiration of 1 year after the date of notice

of an award or disallowance, or by denial on appellate review, whichever is the earlier.

(See §§ 20.1103 and 20.1104 of this chapter.)

(e) Reopened claim.

Any application for a benefit received after final disallowance of an earlier claim, or any

application based on additional evidence or a request for a personal hearing submitted

more than 90 days following notification to the appellant of the certification of an appeal and

transfer of applicable records to the Board of Veterans Appeals which was

not considered by the Board in its decision and was referred to the agency of

original jurisdiction for consideration as provided in

§ 20.1304(b)(1) of this chapter.

(Authority: 38 U.S.C. 501)

[john999]

Pete992

Yes, big retro makes the DRO go blind. It blinds the BVA also if the retro is big enough and involves even a tiny bit of guts.

[Berta]

I think I beat this one to death here already

and the thread not only took a turn for the worse-one member hasn't been back here since.

Philip sees this as I do-

The VBM only references that some Reps might request a reconsideration at the VARO level .They mention nothing as far as helping a claimant prepare a Recon request at the VARO level.

Of course we can file a reconsideration request ourselves with a RO-BUT I believe NVLSP doesnt mention this as

1. there are no regs involving a reconsideration request per se at a RO level -except for one that is filed at the BVA regarding a BVA decision.Those regs come with BVA decisions and I will post them here if needed by anyone.

AND 2.the Recon request -as I had to point out with citations somewhere here-within last few weeks does NOT satisfy the NOD regs or timeframe.

The year NOD period could easily slip by if a vet believed the RO was acting on their request.

I had recon request filed at VARO level but I marked my calendar.

Although the VA sent me stuff that made no sense and again failed to consider my evidence -(the point of this request)- they appeared to be 'working on the request if you could call it working'-but they would have been high fiveing if I had allowed my NOD time frame to slip away- so I filed NOD within days left for that.(this was my CUE claim presently under Nehmer)

As the citations I posted from BVA cases showed in the other thread - the NOD MUST BE FILED within the one year NOD date-

whether the VA appears to be acting on the recon request or might just have their thumbs up their butts on it hoping the one year NOD time period will run out.

NVLSP doesnt advise a claimant their potential to file Recon Request at the VARO LEVEL (BVA recon request is different)

in my opinion -because they know that NOD date could easily slip by if the claimant thought the request was being actually worked on.

You can present additional evdence in a response to a SOC.

If someone at the RO actually takes the time to read that new evidence they could send you an SSOC or even award the claim based on the additional evidence.

I feel a Reconsideration request is in order (and great to have a POA's support for it ) ONLY when the VA has ignored probative evidence, which you can prove they received, yet they failed to consider.

You can respond to a SOC with additional evidence-within the time frame for response.

Pete and Carlie have given good advise too.

John too- and I think he would agree that the raters and DROs dont have the goonyats it takes to award large retros these days-In spite of overwhelming evidence that warrants a big award.

This is why I had to put pressure on the General COunsel to get my money from my last award.They (VARO) refused to pay me my retro for almost a year.

The re-open stuff that cropped up here a few weeks ago as well made no sense.

But the member didn't return to hadit to clarify what they meant.