Can't Log In to VA Site Using va.gov Login

[Max Rommel]

Hi everyone. Recently there seem to be a change. Instead of using my DS Login info the VA wants me to login using va.gov. I signed up for it and got approved with a PW. Plus it sends me a one-time code. But from there when I try to go to "My Va" I get an error message. I attached a snapshot of the message to this post. So basically I can't get in any longer to see my claims. What am I doing wrong?

Thanks. Max

[Lemuel]

2 hours ago, broncovet said:

VA has about 3 different and confusing ways to login:  myhealthyvet, DS login and ID me.  

And, as pointed out, its glitchy.  Tens of billions of dollars have been put into VA's IT systems and its mostly wasted money.  

It seems VA loves to "micromanage" IT companies they hire to do the job.  A much better way is to do it the old fashioned way:

1.  Have users and government employees write down and document what new features/changes to the website they want.  

2.  Grant some limited access, such as read only to see if the changes the programmers make "actually work".  

3.  Let the programmers be until the programmers are satisfied the freshly minted software works.  

4.  Test the software in Beta to be glitch free in a limited number of users. 

5.  Turn on the new software, after testing.  

     None of this involves micro management.  Instead, it lets programmers be programmers, users be users.  Users often know little or nothing about programming and programmers often know little or nothing about being a user.  

     For this reason, it takes some trust, and teamwork..not micromanagement.  VA does not trust Veterans, and Veterans do not trust VA.  Its a toxic environment, where little progress can be made.  

     The solution is mostly about trust.  While its true you can get burned with trust, its actually a mental illness where you trust no one.  You just have to use some discretion on who to trust.  

     The "dont trust Veterans" policy is a bad one.  Remember, Veterans who served our country honorably, have already established trust, or should have.  They promised to serve, and kept that committment.  

     For that reason, Veterans should be trusted more than employees who have mostly "not" shown they can keep a long term committment.  (4 years, 10 years, 20 years, etc).  The VA policy of trusting a six month employee, probably hired through nepotism, over a Veteran who served 4 years is a bad idea, and contrary to common sense. 

     Someone pointed out the IRS trusts hundreds of millions of taxpayers..hundreds of millions of tax refunds done in a few weeks or even sometimes days.  Then, later, upon audit, if the taxpayer lied, he/she is prosecuted to the full extent of the law.  

     A similar system should work with Va.  A Veteran who applies for benefits should have only minimal documentation for him or her to be paid benefits, just like the IRS.  

However, if its determined the Veteran lied on their application, exaggerated symptoms etc etc.  then they should be prosecuted.  

     Soon, crooks would be scared to lie to VA, because their buddies would be in jail.  Just like IRS fraud.  Most honest people are afraid to lie to the IRS, because they know they will be fact checked.  

     Va, because of the weak VAOIG, is a joke.  While I never recommend lying to VA, way too many who do lie to VA get away with it.  Its usually an inside job, with some rater knowing a friend or family member granting benefits the Vet does not deserve...sometimes the person isnt even a veteran.  

     Yes, its true that most VA employees are hard working, and honest.  However, there is much corruption there, often at high levels.  And, whistle blowers are retaliated against, and VA gets away with retaliating against whistle blowers again and again, because of a weak VAOIG, which is the fox guarding the hen house.  

     This is an example of how honest VA employees are terrified by corrupt high up officials, knowing they will retaliate.  

     https://www.pogo.org/investigation/2020/03/terrified-of-retaliation-inside-veterans-affairs-whistleblower-office

Whistle blower retaliation is not just related to VA employees.  As a veteran activist. I currently have a whistle blower complaint at the BVA for destroying my VA Medical file and having had to replace it from a 2- or 3-year-old file copy to another medical organization.  Refusal to provide medical evidence by the Medical Division facilities to the Benefits Division facilities and refusal of the Benefits facilities to pursue the evidence until it was obtained.

The BVA cannot order an outside opinion on EEG tracings or radiographic film if it looks very similar to the untrained eye and yet there are two radically different interpretations on the evidence related to the same person's body part.

[Dustoff1970]

Unfortunely many many years ago the Supreme court in Chevron v. Natural Resources ruled that all federal agencies can in fact interpret vaguely worded laws written by congress in normal and majority of decisions and said without my quoting that normally federal or state courts could not interfere with agencies interpretations except in most clear cut non vague and specific congressional intent law on an issue.

Today or yesterday Wall Street Journal Opinion article covered the Chevron court decision in great detail, and this explains a lot to me about federal agency actions.  

Chevron U.S.A. Inc. v. Natural Resources Defense Council, 467 U.S. 837 (1984).

The Chevron doctrine requires federal courts to defer to an agency’s interpretation of a statute if (1) the statute is ambiguous and (2) the agency interpretation is reasonable. The Supreme Court’s Decision The Supreme Court held that Chevron was inapplicable.

Supreme Court Places Another Limitation on Chevron Deference

ogletree.com/insights/supreme-court-places-another-limitation-on-chevron-defer

Edited August 24, 2022 by Dustoff1970

[Lemuel]

1 hour ago, Dustoff1970 said:

Unfortunely many many years ago the Supreme court in Chevron v. Natural Resources ruled that all federal agencies can in fact interpret vaguely worded laws written by congress in normal and majority of decisions and said without my quoting that normally federal or state courts could not interfere with agencies interpretations except in most clear cut non vague and specific congressional intent law on an issue.

Today or yesterday Wall Street Journal Opinion article covered the Chevron court decision in great detail, and this explains a lot to me about federal agency actions.  

Chevron U.S.A. Inc. v. Natural Resources Defense Council, 467 U.S. 837 (1984).

The Chevron doctrine requires federal courts to defer to an agency’s interpretation of a statute if (1) the statute is ambiguous and (2) the agency interpretation is reasonable. The Supreme Court’s Decision The Supreme Court held that Chevron was inapplicable.

Supreme Court Places Another Limitation on Chevron Deference

ogletree.com/insights/supreme-court-places-another-limitation-on-chevron-defer

Mine ties up with medical malpractice in refusing to make diagnosis that should have been made and misleading hospital summaries.  You may be right that the whistle blower angle will not meet muster.  Have to wait for the BVA Decision as the sole finder of fact in BVA Decisions before going to the Courts of Appeals.

Thanks for the heads up. I will argue differently with emphasis on medical malpractice "whistle blower" type actions instead of trying to use the gap in the whistle blower law.  And will approach in both directions to see where it goes in the VA's destruction and loss of records.

 

[Dustoff1970]

Yes the full explanation by legal experts of Chevron is on page A15 of todays online WSJ.  They discuss the book called The Chevron Doctrine about the case. It is too long for me to cut and paste here.

[Vync]

@Dustoff1970The Chevron precedent applies a bit differently to VA disability claims. Due to other laws/legal precedents, the VA must also factor in relative equipoise/benefit of the doubt except in closed CUE-related claims. Like everyone else, I have had the VA try to take the vague approach, but won on appeal due to relative equipoise a few cases.

[Dustoff1970]

Yes I agree pacmanx and in my appeals to both the BVA and CAVC over the years they have ruled in my favor over the VARO and CP examiners "inadequate" and "deficient" reasons for denying my claims of CUE, OSA and IHD increase. In addition to Chevron the VARO and sometimes even the CAVC uses the Administrative Procedures Act of 1933 with later amendments to rule against vets' disability claims.

The APA establishes two standards of judicial review:^[1][2][7]

• Substantial evidence
  • Substantial evidence is required in cases involving decisions made during formal rulemaking or formal adjudication.
  • Courts must uphold agency decisions that are "reasonable, or the record contains such evidence as a reasonable mind might accept as adequate to support a conclusion."
• Arbitrary-or-capricious test
  • Courts reviewing agency regulations are instructed to overturn actions they find to be "arbitrary, capricious, an abuse of discretion, or otherwise not in accordance with law."
  • This test is most often used when reviewing the factual basis of a rulemaking, especially for informal rulemakings.

According to the Regulatory Group and the Center for Effective Government, in practice, these two tests are applied in very similar ways.

In other words according to BVA decisions and court cases I have read the VA benefits administration is assumed to perform their VA claims adjudication process in a proper and correct and timely manner unless the vet can prove otherwise such as in the example you mentioned.  They (BVA CAVC) very often use the APA above wording in their decisions and quote the ACT. The burden is upon the vet to prove otherwise which does happen sometimes such as failure to give the vet the benefit of doubt in VARO decisions.

My comment not legal advice as I not a lawyer, paralegal or VSO.

 

Edited August 25, 2022 by Dustoff1970