Partial Grant Partial Remand

[broncovet]

I have received a BVA decision that is partly remanded, and partly awarded, for seperate issues.

My question is, do you think they will process the "award" part right away, or will I have to wait to get my retro until the remand is completed. The remand could take months or years to resolve, and since its a seperate issue, I am hoping they will pay me the "award" portion (retro).

Has anyone had a partial award partial remand, and did they pay you right away and then take care of the remanded issue or did you have to wait forever?

[broncovet]

I havent told my family yet but I am "sharing" my retro with family members..and hoping to do so well before Christmas. We will see..

[carlie]

I havent told my family yet but I am "sharing" my retro with family members..and hoping to do so well before Christmas. We will see..

OK bronco here's my twenty bucks worth -

Put about 4 or 5 K to the side in a money market savings.

You know I'm right - so don't fight it - lol.

[broncovet]

Gee...after all those good things I said about you Carlie. Im taking them back. You are costing my kids money!

Now stop counting peanuts...I have..and start helping me with the "Big Mac Attack". I am still working on the 2002 effective date, and, they kind of opened the door with their partial award. I think they are throwing me a bone while they rob the house and hope I wont notice while I am chewing on their 15 grand. Nope. I applied in 2002, and, while I will enjoy their bone, I earned that bone and want the steak to go with it.

I lost my home waiting on the VA to pay my benefits, so Im keeping going, like the energizer bunny, until I get my house back.

[deanbrt]

I had a full grant from BVA and the RO tried to hold it up for another claim. What the regulations read and what they do are not the same.

[Berta]

Deanbrt said "What the regulations read and what they do are not the same. "

I have found that personally to be so true.

However I fought all of my claims not only with medical evidence but also with copies of the actual regulations.

It took the Office of General Counsel,in one situation I had, to send the VARO the same regs I had sent them,in order to get a proper payment regarding an FTCA offset matter.

I had the award letter, and even a statement from the BVA in a past claim I had,

that warranted this payment , as well as the actual regulation as evidence, but I had to get tough AGAIN with them to do it right.

I was sure at first the Regional Counsel would have intervened at my written request but he wouldn't, and sent me some BS letter, as to not having jurisdiction but some top honcho at OGC heeded my request and contacted the RO and the RO paid me right away.

Of course I had to argue with the OGC office too ,for weeks, before that happened.

They never had a similiar case, and that might have been part of the problem but still, the regs stated specifically the exact point that I had made which warranted an offset FTCA refund..

As claimants we focus a lot on the regulations involving medical evidence but all of the 38 USC/ CFR regulations (and M21-1MR) are as binding on the VA as they are on us.

When I look back at my ordeals with VA over the past 17 years, I should have asked them,during the appellate period right after their decisions came, to CUE themselves more then I actually did.

I have one decision whereby the rater actually made up a regulation in order not to pay me the above FTCA money.

I could hardly believe what I was reading when that decision came.

[broncovet]

I agree with Berta. The VARO does "make stuff up" when there is no regulation to support their position.

This Board decision, for example, wants to make me "go away" especially in my allegations of shredding, as the Board did not even "whisper" my allegations of document mishandling even tho I brought it up repeatedly in the NOD, the I9, and it a 2008 letter requesting special handling.

Remember, it is the RO who prepares all the documents to be sent to the Board. The RO is the gatekeeper and decides which evidence will be forwarded on to the Board, and which will not. This is inherently a conflict of interest, and inherently unfair. It would be like, if you had a "beef" with your neighbor, to sue him in court, and the court required you send all the documents to the neighbor and for the neighbor decided which documents you submit will be forwarded to the court.

This is why I think sometimes you want to send evidence directly to the Board, and not go through the RO gatekeeper where it tends to get lost.

This Board decision also "denied" benefits for my dependents, because they said I did not mail in their birth certificates until after a year after the RO award decision, for example. This is not true. Benefit information was included in the original 21-526. The RO, when I requested a copy of my C file, instead mailed me the original, and threw away the copy of several pages of the 21-526.

I took these down to my VSO, and he wrote a letter that he recognized his own handwiting..that he had done the 21-526 and that I have the original "ink" version, which includes dependents benefits. Its just an example of claim spoilation, and document mishandling, where the VARO wants me to pay the price. Dependent benefits for about 6 years is rather a large amount of money, because I have a "college age" son and it is more than $20,000, so both the RO and the Board try to get out of paying it. I am considering a MFR while resubmitting the evidence of the VSO's letter, as much of this stuff, too, was shredded or mishandled. Im not giving up. I KNOW I sent those dependent info years ago, and I am not putting up with them trying to get out of paying and then covering it up, with still more lost documents. I am sending the evidence direct to the Board, not to the RO, so they cant shrug their shoulders and say their is "no evidence" in the record demonstrating benefit application at an earlier DATE. I am tired of their BS, and they are realy starting to make me mad.

Edited September 8, 2012 by broncovet