What to do when VA disregards this?

[UpToHere]

“Administrative law” may sound like a boring subject, but it isn’t. It’s both fascinating and, in the 73-year history of the Administrative Procedure Act, more important than ever for providing the legal structure in which encounters between citizens and their government take place. The Administrative Procedure Act doesn’t tell the government what to do. It simply requires that actions of federal agencies be supported by reasoned decision-making. When challenged, agencies have to provide explanations that are plausible and consistent rather than “arbitrary and capricious.”

[retiredat44]

yews, but the request for the reasoning is a nightmare, just getting the request to be takes, accepted, then the venue, then recorded officially... who makes al that happen? how? those are the questions us peons can't get through because they do not listen to us. Back to paying for a legal process to get answers.

[broncovet]

BVA and VARO decisions are supposed to be supported by "an adequate reasons and bases for decision".  

At the Board level, many many times BVA cases are remanded by the CAVC due to "an inadequate reasons and bases" for decision.  

This is both good and bad.  Attorneys get paid from EAJA for a "remand win" which may or may not result in additional compensation for the Veteran.  

In one way, I dont like that lawyers get paid when Vets dont.  GRRRRR.  But, this said, a remand for "reasons and bases" often "pries open" a case because the Veteran is permitted to submit "additioanal evidence" AND, that additional evidence goes to the beginining of the appeal period, as explained in 38 cfr 3.156 B.

I actually won most of my benefits "on remand" from the CAVC where I submitted new evidence.  (Usually this means an IMO).  

You see, decision makers often "dont like" to revise a previous decision without new evidence.  In other words, ok, the last decision maker said "no", AND, he also says, "no".  

Res Judicata actually prevents VA from doing that:

https://www.law.cornell.edu/wex/res_judicata#:~:text=Overview,final judgment on the merits.

Quote

Res judicata

Primary tabs

 

Definition

Res judicata translates to "a matter judged." 

Overview

Generally, res judicata is the principle that a cause of action may not be relitigated once it has been judged on the merits. "Finality" is the term which refers to when a court renders a final judgment on the merits.