HLR Informal Conference? Statement? Both?

[harry59]

Hello all. Hopefully an easy question as I can assume that there are a good number of people that have questioned this, and have gone either way, when appealing to a Higher Level Review (HLR).

When I fill out my paperwork for a HLR, should I check the  box and ask for an Informal Conference? Should I just submit a statement? Should I do both?

I have heard good arguments for, and against, the informal conference. Some say it's better to speak to the rater to make your case and make sure that all the evidence was looked at. Others say that It's better to submit a statement making your case because the rater can't look at the claim until you're on the phone with them if you choose a conference, and that you may inadvertently say something that goes against you, and the HLR will take longer if you select the informal conference rather than submitting a statement. I'm not sure if all that is true or not. I'm leaning toward doing both, but am not sure as I don't want to delay my claim any longer than it needs to be.

Any advice is much appreciated!

[broncovet]

If you have no problems talking to people, go for that.  Or, if you prefer, write it down if that is more comfortable.  Do what you are good at.  

[deedub75]

With an HLR, you're not supposed to include any additional evidence, but I'm not sure if a statement would be considered evidence. I submitted an HLR for an earlier effective date and I did ask for the informal conference. It is possible that asking for the conference could delay your claim but I think it's worth it. You can plead your case and point out evidence that they possibly missed. 

My informal conference was very short because the DRO had reviewed my claim and agreed that my effective dates were incorrect and that she was going to correct them., which she did do.  

Edited March 25, 2022 by deedub75

[harry59]

I'm not 100% sure but I was told that a statement was ok as long as it didn't contain any new evidence. I will find out for sure before I file. Thank you for your reply. 

[Mr cue]

I would have the conference it will become part of your record.

So if you do have to appeal to the board it will be part of your record

It is much faster to get the conference than bva hearing.

I have a couple of claims won during the conference also

Good luck

[harry59]

Thanks, I appreciate it.

[Jake206th]

I should have gone with the HLR informal conference if I went HLR at all. Because you get to talk to the actual person that makes a decision of your appeal and sort everything out on the spot.

There are so many conflicting stories about the HLR process. For example, the VAF 20-0996 section IV states that: “You may submit a written statement that identifies errors of fact or law along with this application form instead of requesting an informal conference”

I don't see anywhere that states that you cannot still file written arguments as well as do an informal conference, and then just read that statement at the informal conference.

I have read several HLR conferences where the examiner didn't even review the file before the hearing because your hearing is specifically for you to point out errors of fact or law, and it is supposedly recorded, transcribed and entered into your c file. 

VAF 20-0996 section IV: "The sole purpose of the optional telephone contact is to provide the opportunity to identify errors of fact or law in the decision(s) under review."

So the HLR said they didn't review the file because they were waiting for the hearing to consider the legal arguments.

But I have also read where people submitted their written arguments with their 20-0996 and also had a hearing, where the HLR had already read the arguments.

 

Also I have read where the VA never even called the Veteran to schedule a hearing even though one was selected, and just made a decision without doing a hearing.

 

As to the new evidence vs arguments on an HLR issue, here is what M21 states;

 

Manual M-21-5, 5.4 d, - Higher Level Review Procedures, Differentiating Between Argument and Evidence.

“The higher-level reviewer should remember that argument is not evidence. The closed evidentiary record of an HLR precludes the consideration of new evidence, but it permits the consideration of new argument.”

 “A claimant or representative may properly add, and the reviewer may properly consider, new argument to pinpoint or highlight VA’s potential misreading of facts, or its potential misapplication of law to the facts that the evidentiary record has already established.”

“Argument is the attempt to persuade someone to a particular view or belief using reason or fact.”

 

VAF 20-0996 section IV: "Evidence that was not of record at the time of the decision will not be considered."

 

 

 

I am not a lawyer and nothing I write is legal advice. It is just how things appear to me based on my limited understanding. and I may be incorrect.

Edited February 4, 2023 by Jake206th