Is The Va There To Help Vets With Their Claims?

[Pete53]

I have read many hundreds or maybe thousands of BVA Claims and have yet to see where a VA Attorney was helpful to a Veteran. I wonder why this is. Isn't the purpose of the VA to help Veterans not be adversarial and yet that is the way it is.

Is there anyone on Hadit who believes that the VA tried to help them with their claim?

It seems to me that as we try to get the wounded Veteran back up and functioning the VA is missing an opportunity to lead rather than follow. For most of these Veterans it is not rocket science that shows they are needing help and plenty of it.

The VA should appoint free legal representation to any Veteran who has to stand before the BVA of CVA in my opinion.

[Stretch]

Glad your back Army and Vike.

FYI, I figured out how I got the truck in my nose. I was reading another report from the same ENT on the C&P.

----------------------

striking his nose.

s tr?ck ing his nose.

...truck in his nose.

----------------------

It took me a while to figure this out. hehe

[Hoppy]

Vike,

Also glad to see your back. Keep posting.

John,

Late 2005 is a long time. You are starting to approach my record. Have you had any MRI's or EMG's since the increase in pain? Being post surgical your situation can be very complex. Have you found any suport groups on line for back problems. You really need to become involved and talk with people who have been through the mill with doctors. I learned alot about the treatment of angioedema from an online support group.

As far as the VA goes I would think you need to get updated MRI's and EMG's or show changes in your range of motion in order to impress them for the necessity for a rating change. As I say many times, get familiar with the rating schedule and match up the schedule to your condition.

[free_spirit_etc]

I like what you said about an honest evaluation. I think that is what most people want. I don't think we expect the VA to do everything for us -- or grant service connection without evidence of such -- but it is especially frustrating when they just breeze through the information and overlook very important things.

I think they refer to this as topsheeting. That was pretty apparent in my husband's lung cancer claim. Some of his previous claims --whether they were granted or denied --were somewhat fairly based on evidence presented.

Others SEEMED that way on the surface - but if you read the case with any depth at all - you could see they weren't as fair as they could have been. Again - fair does not always mean grant it -- it does mean the evidence was fairly considered.

But his lung cancer claim was just OUT there. Their responses weren't thorough --and didn't even give the appearance of trying to appear that way.

It looked more like something you would write while you were drving or something.

You can tell they just looked at the C&P exam -- that wasn't even an exam - and just repeated some of the things the examiner stated. And they didn't even get THAT part right.

It is kind of like when you aregue with someone - You don't always expect them to agree --but you want them to at least hear what you say. And when they take one or two things out of context and act like that is the whole thing -- it is just totally frustrating.

Free

After being denied several times for hearing loss, accused of making false statements to a C&P examiner in order to defraud the government, making false statements concerning naval occupation in service in order to defraud the government, I was lucky enough to an"honest" evaluation by a VARO claims officer. This guy was actually competent enough to read english.

After reading what my DD214 says & the separation examination that showed hearing & vision loss during service in whats left of my SMR's, he decided at least a 0% should be granted. At this same hearing, my DAV SO at the time, filed for multiple issues after viewing my SMR's & the officer agreed, that these claims should be filed.

Since than, 1995 or 96' maybe, ALL favorable evidence has been ignored. SMR's, C&P's, MD opinions, IMO's from DR Bash, including anything that resembles a nexus.

ALL of my original service records are stored at the Seattle VARO, not the National Records Center.

What duty to assist is supposed be, & what a vet recieves, is like day & night.

Obstruction of Justice is a crime.

[SLEDGE]

One note of interest to bring up.

When they deny TDIU because you don't have that magic 40% disability rating, it's an illegal cop-out.

That 60% and 40% stuff is only one half of the regulation, the half that they like to quote because to many of us don't catch it.

The amount of disability that they have previously awarded does not qualify or disqualify a vet who applies for TDIU.

The qualifier is: whether or not the vet is unemployable due to a service connected disability, period.

According to their own regulations, a vet can be awarded TDIU and P&T with a zero percent rating if the disability produces unemployability.

To save face, they will always give out a significant rating percentage to go along with, whenever TDIU is granted, if the vet did not have a 40% rating prior to getting TDIU.

That way they can claim that nobody lower than 40% gets awarded TDIU.

I went from 20% to TDIU.

The kicker was the new 50% that they awarded at the same time as the TDIU.

They did miss the effective date by 14 years though.

I'm at the court again looking for the retro.

sledge

[Jay Johnson]

The biggest problem with the VA is discretion. Honestly, I wish someone would do a study in which the EXACT same case was presented to EVERY RO in the country (without their knowledge and with a different SS# to cover) just to see how many different ratings the fake veteran would get. I bet you would see everything from a very high rating to no service connection at all or a 0% rating.

This is where the system is terribly flawed. It is compounded by interdepartmental loyalties in which the appeal teams tend to side with the initial review teams more often than not. So, when a decision is oddly low, it ends up being confirmed and the process can take years to fix.

Personally, I think they need more standardization, more training and the ROs need to have some sort of penalty when they clearly violate regulations (which they do often). Without these things, the cases end up being a crap shoot depending on your local, the reviewers training/mood at the time and your VA doctor's discretion (and you have to know some of them are under pressure not to rubber stamp every claim).

It's a bureaucratic nightmare in my opinion.

[Hoppy]

I guess its time I need to jump in on this one.

I think that there is a bigger problem with the individuals in the system than the system itself. Not only is discretion a problem where some individuals work there agendas there are people who work for the VA who are just plain dishonest. This is especially a possibility if they were hired by the VA with work histories in adjudication of work injury claims under state laws.

I went to a school under vocational rehabilitaion that taught me how to "discover" and prepare evidence for claims involving work injuries. After attending the school for several weeks I was told that the school was focused on working for claim defenses rather than plaintiff's. This is because insurance carriers are more likely to use the services that I was being trained for than plantiff attorneys.

While in school we were taught to only "discover" evidence that benefited the insurance carrier. Thus, if we were filming an injured worker who was in fact unable to do certian activities that were claimed in the suit against the carrier to turn offf the camera and only film the events that were negative for the plaintiff. We were told to lie if asked why we turned off the camera and say we turned off the camera becsue we were working under cover and are cover would have been exposed. We also were trained to advise employers how to deal with difficult employees who might be a liability to the employer. We were taught to "Frame" the employee for an activity that would get him fired.

Now for the VA. Liars can be anywhere. I entered vocational rehabilitation at the VA. I thought I would get $261.00 a month while in voc rehab. I attended the vets garden and was being trained to be a gardner. Three weeks into the program I was sent to a job interview working for city govt. in the parks dept. I was hired and started a civil service career. A couple months went by and I did not get my measily check for the month I was at the vets garden. I called the guy at the RO who put me in the programm and he told me the program I was in was not compensatable. I asked to talk to his supervisor.

The supervisor told me that the program was not compensatable. He asked me if I had a copy of the rehab plan. I told him I was not given a copy. He said it was my word against the guy who put me in the program. The next day I remembered that when I was working at the vets garden that the non compensated people only worked three days a week. I was put in a five day a week program. I asked the person who scheduled my hours at the vets garden if she put on five days because of something I told her or if she had somethoing from the RO. She told me she had worked there much to long to listen to vets. She said she had documentation from the RO to put me in the compensatable program. I told her about the problem I was having getting my check. She said it had happened before. She said to have the RO call her.

I called the supervisor at the RO the next day and told him it was no longer my word against the word of his rehab guy. I told him the vets garden says they have documentation that I was in a compensated program. The supervosor told me to call him the next day and he would look into it. I called and he told me that I was in a part time compensatable program. I told him that part time compensation was never discussed and that if he had a copy of a rehab plan that I signed saying I was in a part time program to produce the plan. He knew I busted him at a lie and no such plan existed. He went biserk and started laying a guilt trip on me as to how they had got me a job with the city and wasn't that enough. Both the rehab rep and his supervisor were liars as far as I see it.

Edited May 10, 2007 by Hoppy