Jump to content
  • 0

Is the ITF(Intent to File) erased because of AMA or Opt into RAMP?


Buck52

Question

  • Moderator

Anybody know if a Veteran opts into the RAMP and has filed an INT (Intent to File)   Will VA Accept it just as if it were still in Legacy or traditional claims process?

They don't erase a INT do they? if veteran is opt into RAMP...I REALIZE A Veteran can't opt back to Legacy once he opts into RAMP.

Anybody know?

Quote

 

?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Answers 15
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters For This Question

15 answers to this question

Recommended Posts

  • 0
  • Moderator

Anyone??  I never knew it if its true?...If the ITF is out   I need to stop saying to file a ITF Claim

Just need the correct Information on this.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 0
10 hours ago, Buck52 said:

Anyone??  I never knew it if its true?...If the ITF is out 

@Buck52

Asknod has an article on his site at that includes info on pre-AMA ITF's.

https://asknod.org/2019/02/24/ramp-screw-me-twice-shame-on-me/

What we know for sure from that article is that he states any ITF filed prior to Feb 19, 2019 change to the AMA process, is dead and gone. Look for the word "cowboy" in his article and you will find it easily.

It is still an open question if the AMA process will include an ITF. Ebennies as of yesterday still had that option.

From what I can tell the AMA change has people in 3 different processes. Legacy, RAMP and AMA. Any new claim filed from Feb 19 on is definitely in AMA. Claims that involve the other two processes have varying degree of changes or affects from AMA.

I am trying to wade through how it affect me which is why I keep asking all these questions.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 0
On 5/6/2019 at 11:25 PM, Buck52 said:

I never knew it if its true?...If the ITF is out   I need to stop saying to file a ITF Claim 

@buck52

I just filed for my first claim under the new AMA, May 8, 2018, During the process It showed me my existing Intent To File (see attached screen print) with a Aug 24, 2019 expiration date.

I will post another thread about what I just experienced with this claim. It is a Secondary Claim to PTSD and the ITF was created under the Legacy System which knowing the VA may be completely different than a brand new First Claim being done under AMA.

For now, we will have to wait and see until someone posts about a Brand New First Claim under AMA.

We will also have to wait and see what they do about granting that EED for this claim considering the ITF.

Intent to File notice in ama application filed 5-8-2019.pdf

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 0
  • Moderator

ok the ITF is still in effect one year later after filing a claim  so it has not been erased.

Thanks Geeky.

Edited by Buck52 (see edit history)
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 0
  • Moderator

The regulations state (somewhere) that, if 2 different regulations apply, then the Vet gets the more favorable one.  

In this case, since the Vet filed an ITF, and, apparently those went away, the Veteran should still get the earlier date benefit of the ITF.  

Lots of regulations change.  For example, you used to not even need to file an application form for increase.  Now you do.  However, if you filed an informal claim prior to the regulation change, it should still be valid.  

There are many, many regulatory changes..especially now.  In theory, the Veteran should get "the more favorable" of the 2 regulations.    That is, if the Vet filed an ITF and met the criteria, he should still get the benefit of the earlier effective date, once benefits are awarded..back to the later of the date  of the ITF filing or facts found.  

This is my opinion, but, of course, it probably has not been tested in court, and it is far too new to be in the VBM. 

Its my opinion that, for Vets who properly filed an ITF, they will get the benefit of the earlier date, but, of course, if that regulation was pulled, then ITFs filed after the regulation wont be honored, but those filed while the ITF regulation is in effect will be honored.  

This is the same way it is, for, say informal claims.  I cant file an informal claim now, on a 21-4138 or a blank sheet of paper, but those filed earlier, while that was in effect, will be honored.   

Edited by broncovet (see edit history)
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 0
2 hours ago, Buck52 said:

so it has not been erased.

@Buck52

np.

I do want to caution anyone reading this, that this might be a one off based on the exact circumstances of this claim and ITF.

On the other hand the ITF as a function may not be going away with the changes due to the modernization act.

sadly it is just one more thing that has to be monitored.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 0
29 minutes ago, broncovet said:

The regulations state (somewhere) that, if 2 different regulations apply, then the Vet gets the more favorable one.  

@broncovet

I knew that applied to issues in equipose, but I did not know it applies to legislative or regulatory changes.

It would be amazing if you found that.

This statement by you touches on stuff I was reading today about whether a CFR change outweighs the USC. I think it was an OPGen opinion. I will try to find it. If I remember right that is not what the opinion said but I will look for it.

Update:

I just found what I was reading. It was in the Federal Register

 

https://www.federalregister.gov/documents/2019/01/18/2018-28350/va-claims-and-appeals-modernization

One comment expressed concern that § 3.155(b), Intent to file, does not apply to supplemental claims and recommends recision of this limitation. However, 38 U.S.C. 5110 of the new statutory framework provides that a claimant can maintain the potential effective date of a potential benefits award by submitting a request for review under any of the three new lanes within one year of the date of the decision with which the claimant disagrees. Consistent with this requirement, the intent to file provisions of § 3.155(b) do not apply to supplemental claims because the statute prescribes a one-year filing period in order to protect the effective date for payment of benefits. The commenters recommendation would allow for the submission of a supplemental claim beyond the one-year period. For these reasons, VA will not make any changes to § 3.155 based on the commenter's recommendation

 

This goes with another piece from Asknod at https://asknod.org/2019/02/24/ramp-screw-me-twice-shame-on-me/

in short the legacy system NOD will hit the RO and until the SOC is issued you will stay in the Legacy path. With the SOC you will be offered one of the three lanes in the Modernized System.

That is how they are getting around 3.155(b) with it's year requirement.

 

Edited by GeekySquid (see edit history)
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 0
18 minutes ago, GeekySquid said:

That is how they are getting around 3.155(b) with it's year requirement.

Interestingly enough the M21-1 on line says

III.iv.5.C.2.a.  Applicability of ITF on Effective Date Assignment 

 
On March 24, 2015, 38 CFR 3.155 was revised to include procedures for a claimant to indicate a desire to file a claim via submission of an ITF.  When an ITF is properly submitted, and a complete initial claim is received within one year of the ITF, the complete initial claim is considered filed as of the date the ITF was received.  
 
Note:  The regulations governing ITF acceptance and impact, including 38 CFR 3.155, are not effective date rules.  The provisions for ITF apply to the date a claim is considered received, which in turn may impact determinations about effective dates.
 
Reference:  For more information on procedures for handling ITFs, see M21-1, Part III, Subpart ii, 2.C.2-5.
 
 
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 0
  • Patron

I know I'm new but here's my 2 cents:

ITFs are still a valid thing, but they mostly relate to effective dates and that means they are *typically* going to have more impact on new or original claims.  

AMA, RAMP, and Legacy are all appeals processes, so effective dates for those are usually more complicated than with new/original claims and ITFs are only a single factor among many others that impact effective dates for issues granted on appeal.

I'm unclear about what Buck is trying to get an answer for.  Do you have a scenario?

Thanks,

Phury

Edited by Phury & Rhage (see edit history)
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 0
13 minutes ago, Phury & Rhage said:

I'm unclear about what Buck is trying to get an answer for.  Do you have a scenario?

@Phury & Rhage

It's the same situation that I have with Legacy and an ITF I had filed.

When the VA changed over on Feb 19th, 2019 to the AMA process a lot of stuff happened and that always causes questions.

In my case I had filed an ITF under Legacy. Finally got another claim settled so I wanted to file the next claim. That other claim was complicated and took way too long to claim and I did not wantthe VA to combine the new claim with the old. I Learned the hard way that if they combine claims the decisions (and money) can take much longer.

Buck is asking if the same holds for RAMP people. I suspect they do converge at some point. In theory, people in ramp already at the BVA will stay in ramp and their ITF's will remain active but that filing would end up under AMA not RAMP.

In my case I when I went to file the NEW claim, the system saw the ITF and said it is there. So I filed.That was on May 8th, then on May 16th VES called to set up an appt for me on the C&P. that is fairly rapid. The claim should be an easy one to decide and there are no medical tests involved just answering questions. My med records at the VA document the issue.

I will post in my own tracking thread under this forum the stages I am going through just to set a time clock on how fast the AMA takes on a NEW easy claim.

As a side note, when this question came up in another thread I went to VA.GOV and "opened" a new claim. IN the process, step 3 I think, it popped up a screen that said Your Intent to File has been saved. Then it says "we found an existing ITF and you can have only one at a time".

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 0
  • Patron

Excellent!  The thing with filing online is that any time you open an application and hit save - whether you ever finish it or not - it creates an ITF.  I don't know how the software handles it, but the processors know that the subsequent one gets labeled "duplicate" and has no effect.  Obviously, an ITF is only good for 1 year or less (until you file a claim that it attaches to).  But an ITF is also only good for ONE claim - the 1st valid claim after the ITF is created.  Once you file a valid claim, the active ITF is attached to that claim.  Then, you need to file another ITF so you have another active one for the following year...follow, lol?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 0
29 minutes ago, Phury & Rhage said:

Then, you need to file another ITF so you have another active one for the following year...follow,

@Phury & Rhage

yep that is the sequence as we know.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 0
  • Moderator

38cfr 3.114 explains some of this:

https://www.law.cornell.edu/cfr/text/38/3.114

The Veteran should get the greater amount.

M21 also explains it:

 

Part III, Subpart vi, Chapter 08. Miscellaneous Authorization Issues

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 0
  • Moderator

 Phury& Rhage Quoted

''The thing with filing online is that any time you open an application and hit save - whether you ever finish it or not - it creates an ITF.''  

I think this happen a lot with veterans  , I know when I was filing my claims it happen, I had at one time 5 ITF's After filing one claim.

But I got it all taken off e benefits  I mention ''please disregard/delete my last 4 INT'S as they were submitted by error.''

I understand now  how the ITF works with AMA..

I Information ITF no longer existed.

Thanks Everyone , I got it now , I just don't ever want to miss-inform a Veteran..

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Answer this question...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.



×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

{terms] and Guidelines