One Last Thing...

[vaf]

Think about this. The DAV and VFW share the exact same position on the subject of the Veterans Choice of Representation Act as does the Veterans Administration. Any lack of energy or interest displayed by veterans service officers regarding veteran disability claims could very well be because they are more sympathetic to the needs of the VA than they are to veterans' needs. Kind of like the Stockholm Syndrome.

That's the most glaring example I can think of regarding an unholy alliance that is certainly not in the best interests of disabled veterans.

Anytime service organizations and the Veterans Administration align themselves against veterans on ANY issue, it's time to push for the right to attorney access.

[Berta]

If a vet rep or NSO causes a veteran monetary damages- they can be sued in state courts for negligence.

Been there done that.

If future claimant get the right to have lawyers handle VA claims- I would think (as a ProSe lawyer myself) that lawyers would also consider the potential causes of action that a former negligent SO or vet rep might have incurred on the claim.

However- state courts award monetary damages.

A vet rep has to have caused monetary damages.

Most valid probative VA claims are successful in spite of the crap we have to go through.

It could take years but if the vet succeeds, they have not lost money.

Therefore the dope who negligently represented them is not liable.

[Guest jstacy]

Berta. I totally agree, I would even go so far as to say that the VSO's are in a panic mode because of the fact that once Vets have professional representation they may not be needed as much. This causes loss of membership and thats what they are alll about. Selling memberships.