Rebutting Va's "presumption Of Regularity"...

[broncovet]

In other words, "Who's is telling the truth, the VA who says they dont have the document, or the Veteran who says he mailed it in"?

The VA is given a free ride here. The courts ALWAYS favor VA...and the Veteran is assumed to be a liar. (What ever happened to the "benefit of the doubt"? 38 USC 5107)

If you are in a dispute with VA, I humbly suggest reading ASK nod's analysis of the presumption of regularity, and rebutting it.

https://asknod.wordpress.com/category/presumption-of-regularity-2/

[ArNG11]

I don't see why not, but I'm not sure it would help your case any. The big disclaimer, these are estimates and your case may not follow these exact timeframes. I really hate it but I can't help looking at it, however, it is the sum of all parts, mail, phone calls, inquiries, letters, ebennies, even the automated letters ones that tell you what is going on. Ooh I almost forgot the most important part. THE BBE! aka THE BIG BROWN ENVELOPE! (or white depending on region)

[K9MAL]

I wonder if a screen capture of the E-Bennie pages showing the relevant information (before it gets deleted) would be admissible.

When you upload documents it recommends that you take a screenshot for your records. I uploaded a few things and am not too worried about them disappearing. If they wanted to make paper documents disappear they've proven they can do that just as easily.

Edited January 25, 2015 by K9MAL

[lotzaspotz]

When you upload documents it recommends that you take a screenshot for your records. I uploaded a few things and am not too worried about them disappearing. If they wanted to make paper documents disappear they've proven they can do that just as easily.

On their end, and they've done it several times, for instance, during Shreddergate. Not on our end, with a certified mail receipt attached to the copy. Berta suggested several years ago that we submit our correspondence through a Congressional Representative's local office, which I also have done with particularly sticky situations. Magically, the VA doesn't lose those...

[GatorNavy]

I've been known to walk into the RO and begin to "wallpaper" the place until I received duplicates in the mail. Or, mail in so many letters that their desks look like the judge's bench in the movie "Miracle on 34th St". The first one is the green card but after that I 've used up a book of stamps if need be. My congressional rep used to be the chair of the House Vets Affairs Committee until she was voted out of office, and was "palsy walsy" with the director. Which is why my RO is as screwed up as Hogan's goat!

[Chuck75]

They Can't BS their way out of a certified mail signed receipt. EBennies would only take a few keystrokes and that would be that....

"They Can't BS their way out of a certified mail signed receipt"

Actually, it's happened in the past. They "signed for an item"/"package", and did not "inventory the contents".

So they received something, but claim that they don't/didn't know what the contents were. The "Presumption of Regularity"

applies to documents sent by the VA, not those sent by a veteran. On the other hand, the courts may rule as they choose.

Submitting such documents via a lawyer or member of congress seems to prevent this, not that I've heard of any problems in the more recent past.

Long ago, a recommendation was that a duplicate copy was mailed to oneself at the same time, and on receipt, left sealed,

and filed. I don't think that this is really a needed practice these days. What is to say that the two are identical?

Edited January 26, 2015 by Chuck75

[deltaj]

What is rotten about the presumption of regularity is that it assumes that if V.A. filed its usual mailing practices and

notification to the veteran of a decision even if the letter from V.A. to the veteran isn't in the veteran's file. I have read a few cases where the presumption has been rebutted by the wrong address in the file.