Bva Appeal Decision?

[mags1023]

I just checked my ebenefits page and my appeals status has changed from "with VLJ for decision" to:

03/08/2013 Pending Dispatch BVA 03/08/2013 Decision & Claims File Dispatch

BVA

Can anyone tell me what this means?? I am wondering if I called the BVA, if they could tell me the decision over the phone. I'm really nervous and full of anxiety right now. This 6 years in the making and lots of blood and sweat......hopefully there will be no tears :)

[meghp0405]

I wouldn't feel bad about anything. remember, this is your claim! If you feel that your current lawyer is not doing the best, part ways and fast! The NVLSP has awesome lawyers and an awesome record! I wouldn't hesitate, again, this is your claim...

[mags1023]

Thanks Bronco and meghp. I did sign with this lawyers firm who by the way charges 30%. They make you sign a waiver agreement for an extra 10% above what they legally can charge Vets, so I don't feel much loyalty for them. I think it's time to fire them and find a new lawyer!

[broncovet]

Sounds like it is time to "take out the trash". NVLSP will, if they think your case has merit, represent you pro bono. That is, they will only charge EAJA fees, which you do not have to pay. You will need to forward them your most recent BVA decision, and a short version of why you think the BVA decision is erroneous, or not in compliance with regs.

The NVLSP lawyers will review your case and decide if you have at least one issue of merit. These are no brainers:

1. Failure of the BVA to give a reasons and bases for decision. This results in a minimum of a remand at the CAVC every time. The VA has to give a R and B and it is remandable error when they dont. Once your attorney "wins" a remand, it opens up the can of worms for you to submit new evidence and have it considered by the BVA at the beginning of the appeal period.

2. Any other regulatory failure on the part of the Board. This means, in part, if their is evidence in the RBA (record before agency) FOR your claim, and the Board does not give a reasons and bases as to why they rejected this claimant favorable evidence, then the CAVC will also issue a remand to explain why this evidence was not considered, or given a R and B of why not. If it is "lay" evidence, and the BVA found your evidence "not credible" they have to give a R and B as to why. That is they can not reject lay evidence solely on the bases that you are an "interested party".