HLR vs board appeal

[Remisdad]

I'm going to file an appeal for my TDIU and was wondering which will be my best option.  My old claim is a legacy and I've never used this newer version. What are the pro's and con's of these 2. 

[ShrekTheTank]

IMO I would just go to the board and get it over with.  From what I understand you will probably end up going there anyway.  

[McRay]

The way I have it figured out, and correct me if I'm wrong, is the HLR is a DRO review similar to the SOC review and the board review is done  by VBA law judges. I think you can't submit new evidence with the board review. That said, I think Shrek is right, just go for the board review because HLR will probably deny.

[Fat]

My opinion.

Some say the HLR will just be a rubber stamp of the previous decision.

However you have to know the rating criteria and if the evidence supports a rating.

Service connection is similiar.  In-service incident, current diagnosis, and continuous treatment or nexus statement.

The BVA is a little different.

The issue is based solely off the VA law.

If the evidence is present, more likely than not, the claim will be approved or service connection granted.

 

I'm not a TDIU expert.

Just make sure which ever route you take, the evidence supports the claim.

You might want to consider a vocational rehabilitation specialist to help.

If you can find one, I know them offering an opinion on your employability would be helpful.

 

GOOD LUCK.

[Vync]

I agree with @Fat. I did my homework first so I could be as confident as possible of success and I won two out of four HLR/DRO reviews. In each, I detailed the regulations, rating criteria, the evidence of record, and explained where the VA went wrong by failing to properly apply the laws and regs. One of the ones that was denied related to a life insurance waiver. The other was odd because the reviewer was in agreement with me over the phone, but the decision letter was a rubber stamp of the supplemental denial. Both are on appeal to the BVA.

[broncovet]

HLR is not recommended.  As mentioned, HLR specifically excludes new evidence.  Res Judicata suggests that HLR is not valid:

Quote

res ju·di·ca·ta

/rēz ˌjo͞odiˈkätə,ˈrās/

 

noun

LAW

 

1. a matter that has been adjudicated by a competent court and may not be pursued further by the same parties.

This said, VA GETS away with this, allegedly because the HLR is a more experienced rating specialist.  With a bva decision, you have a 70-80 percent chance of either winning, outright, or getting a remand which allows new evidence.  Only about 20 percent of BVA decisions are denied, its better if you have an attorney (only 10 percent or so Vets lose at the BVA who are represented by an attorney.  But look it up..yourself at the BVA chairmans report.  

In a nutshell odds favor a BVA decision.  Yes, you can appeal a HLR to the board, but you just wasted time, spinning your wheels, going nowhere.  

Expecting "rater B" to grant when "rater A" already denied, is possible, but unlikely.  Its my opinion an HLR is really a cue standard of review, because the rater is unlikely to change the outcome "unless" there is clear unmistakable error.  

If "rater B" made a judgement call, rater A is unlikely to kick the people he works with day after day, by challenging his judgement call.  Its much easier to just deny it also.  

[Vync]

@broncovetoffers good advice. HLR is definitely more like a CUE, but you do not have all the extra restrictions of a CUE unless you submitted a CUE and then it was handled via supplemental or HLR. I actually won a CUE that was submitted as a supplemental, which was very surprising.

HLR does tend to deliver a decision considerably faster, but I have had a 50/50 success/fail rate with HLRs. I attribute the failures to the reviewer being familiar with, but not necessarily an expert in VA laws/regs.