Paid Fraudulent DBQ question

[AllTheWay]

Being that DBQ's are being phased out due to paid fraudulent DBQ's, what will the VA do for people that had paid for DBQ's from the past? Will they investigate to see who had paid for DBQ's? For the people that had paid for them, will the VA order a C&P exam to try to reduce people that had paid for DBQ's? What if people that had paid for DBQ's and received 100% P&T?

IMO they may try something in that nature but the VA system is already back logged, when will they have time to perform such actions.

What about private IMO's/IME's that people had paid big bucks for? Will the VA try to shoot that down next?

SMH. I have not paid for a DBQ or an IMO/IME but  I have sure considered it.

 

Your thoughts Hadit brothers and sisters.

[brokensoldier244th]

 

a 50% inaccuracy/incomplete/no supporting contentions rate is pretty shitty. As for he DBQs they are all still out there and valid so the only net loss is that you can't get them on the VA site. If you have the release filled out your treatment records from your private doctor will be added to the claim during the records request process. Some doctors don't send them, or charge for them, and VA won't pay for that, so there is some of the "my records weren't included in my claim..." accounted for. VA tries twice to get them from your provider, after that they send you a letter and you are on your own for getting them.

Don't know much else to say about it. What you believe about motivations and intent is what you believe. I can't change that. Im just telling you how it is and why. Im not going to get into the "but VA messes up...." discussion because they do, plus its not the point of the original post. Every agency, company, bank, whatever messes up. No one's perfect. 

[pacmanx1]

Bronco said it is not fraud until someone gives false information and signs it or submit it.  Actually someone would have to prove someone committed fraud in a league court.  The OIG found 50% of private DBQs were fraudulent.  WOW that is half the number submitted, does anyone else think this number is way too high.  Now that big Hugh pink elephant sitting in front of our face that no one is talking about is, What was the percentage of the internal or federal government DBQs that were considered fraudulent?  Did the OIG investigate these/those DBQs also and what was the result and are/were they accurate? Since internal DBQs are 'SUPPOSED" to be Legal Government Documents and VA C & P examiners simply falsify their reports is that a form of fraud? Since VA process rating decision that low ball and cheat veterans out of compensation isn't that a form of fraud? VA C & P examiners incomplete VA C & P exams all the time and VA process them and complete, isn't that a form of fraud?   Why is it that when VA get their hands caught doing something wrong they get amnesty periods?  The only VA employee's that get prosecuted are the individuals who seem to be on their own but the system needs some improvement.  Yes, I agree that it appears to be improving but VA could do a lot of things better.  Example: when a veteran files a claim and when VA reviews the veteran's file, inform the veteran at that time what VA could service connect them for and inform the veteran of what could be service connected with more evidence.  This would really put a dent in the back log.  

[brokensoldier244th]

Here's the report. You can read it and see what methodology they used. It wasn't just 50% fraudulent. It was 50% potential fraudulent, incomplete, or performed via phone/remote by private practitioners when they weren't meant for that. The VBA also listed conflicting instructions in M21 instructing claim developers to "accept them at face value" while also instructing them not to accept them when done remotely/telehealth unless done by a contractor/VHA/C and P person.

 

https://www.va.gov/oig/pubs/VAOIG-19-07119-80.pdf

"when a veteran files a claim and when VA reviews the veteran's file, inform the veteran at that time what VA could service connect them for and inform the veteran of what could be service connected with more evidence.'

This is already part of the process. Does it get missed? Yes, but its something that all VSR's are trained from the outset to do with the current training being done, and its one of the things that they are rated on and checked for performance and accuracy goals. 

[63Charlie]

1 hour ago, brokensoldier244th said:

The VBA also listed conflicting instructions in M21 instructing claim developers to "accept them at face value" while also instructing them not to accept them when done remotely/telehealth unless done by a contractor/VHA/C and P person.

 

 

The VA can do those.. but not the veteran.

Unfortunate.

 

[Carl the Engineer]

Here's an idea. 

Why didn't the VA list all the problems they found and offer to help the doctors and Veterans to fill out the DBQ's correctly, or tell them exactly what was missing (incomplete), ect, ect, and at the time of discovery, to correct on the spot, fix and award or deny.  Wouldn't it be cool if a rater called  you and said, hey, your claim mentions a doctors note for your ankle, but I don't see it.  And you say, hold on, I got it right here.  And you fax it to him with him on the line and he say, hey, I got it, and everything looks good now.  But, instead, the rater refers it and sends is to the pile for another rater to see at another time.  I had one claim referred 2 times, both for the examiner to "opine", only to go to another rater (the Q), who never asked the question asked in the first place.  A classic circle jerk.

As an example, you go to buy a car.  12:00 noon. You bring nothing with you.  You tell the dealer you want the red one.  He says we need to fill out some paperwork.  12:20. The finance guy asks for your SS#, and runs a check on you.  Asks you for two weeks check stubs.  Oh, oh, you don't have them with you, but you borrow the dealers phone and have your girlfriend fax the stubs over.  12:40 The finance guy asks you for your insurance.  Oh, oh, you don't have that with you.  You borrow the dealers phone again and get your mom to take a picture of you ins card and send it to the finance guys cell phone.  13:00. Finance guy asks if you have a trade in and you point to the '74 AMC Pacer you came in.  He calls the shop guy to run the Pacer through it's paces.  Haha.  Shop guy tells the dealer its junk and they give you the standard $3000 credit for anything you drive in.  13:30. Credit is good and you agree to the payment terms.  14:00.  You sign all the papers and the dealer shows you all the goodies included in your new ride.  16:00.  You pick up your girlfriend and head to the DQ for a cone.  

In less than four hours, you borrowed 40,000.00, from a bank that did not know you, for a car from a car dealer that didn't know you.  All legit.

Can you imagine if the VA sold cars.  They would be out of business in less than a week.

Instead, the VA denies access to the problem and keeps the Veteran wanting.

By design,

Hamslice

 

[Sgt. Wilky]

For the VA to claim that fraud (I really have no doubt it happens on occasion) is the reason why they're discontinuing the availability of DBQs is a severe case of cognitive dissonance and is the height of hypocrisy.

Just my humble opinion though.

Sgt. Wilky