http://www.rawstory.com/news/2006/Veterans...orney_1215.html

I got this flash from the NVLSP web site-as a link- but have nothing from either VA media or senate news-

Anyone else got a confirmation out there?

I am sure it is true -and NVLSP confirmed it-

still- this was a voice vote-

Here is a glitch:

"However, the Act did not pass Congress in its original form. As written, the package would have allowed veterans to hire attorneys at any stage of the VA claims process and would have included the initial filing of a claim. In the end, the final draft allows veterans to hire an attorney only after the initial claim is denied by the VA. An attorney can then be hired to file a notice of disagreement and take the claim to the Board of Veterans' Appeals. "

I would hope these lawyers would do more than that-hell -we can file our own NODs for a few bucks in mailing fees--a good lawyer could get the award at the regional level-
we need lawyers who will aggressive present and prosecute our claims and the evidence.
Is the VA going to attempt to determine what the lawyers will do?

I dont like it-

Dear Berta

this is actully good news. IF the VA is going to grant benifits. Then do it the first time aroound. IF not then the vet hires a lawyer and that lawyer will make sure the claim is ready for appeal. The lawyer can catch allot of VA errors from the very begining. With the vet having a lawyer I dont see to many remands for no examinatons or improper exams. A good lawyer is not going to waste there time playing out the VA games on claims.

Terry Higgins

Yep, it's true and I think it's a good thing.

The change made was to delay the use of attorney untill a denial is recieved. Then an attorney can file your NOD and be involved from that point on.

Actually, more info is needed on my part. I thought I read that a denial must be recieved, but what about a NOD for rating percentage or EED when a claim is granted?

Guess I better research more.

Time

Berta,

You bring up some good points. At this point you are far more qualified than any general practice attorney to face the almost totally adversarial ex parte VBA system. The ex parte setup is the most basic problem we face. The whole process is totally one-sided and we can't even find out what's happening. This is a classic ex parte setup.

Introducing attorneys early-on removes most of the ex parte curse. Introducing newbie attorneys creates a new problem which is what you're getting at. Right now, we're better at it than they would be!

So, how do we handle it (it being whatever attorney representation turns out to be permitted)?

We'll pay a 20% fee to any attorney. This means we have hired him/her and are their employers. We control.
I've consulted attorneys for years in two areas of law. I do the strategy, they do the legal tactics. I hold them on a leash. I have a federal law enforcement background not that of an attorney. Different attitude and I suggest that we all approach whatever new attorney access along these lines:

1. The hadit.com vets start by doing all the strategy (as we now are).
2. We work with attorneys to learn the practical legal side, compare their approach with our past experience, and WE adjust the strategy to our experienced reality. This becomes the basis for the tactical approach to our claims.

After that, we adjust our approach as the attorneys (and we) learn what the new rules of engagement are.

This comment is neither complete (nor even sage) - haven't fully thought it out yet, and that can take my screwed up mind a bit of time. Lets all cogitate and share.

Ralph

[font=Georgia][size=7]
I think it would be a good idea to have legal representation after the first denial...I know if my claim is Denied at the RO level which it is at now I will need to find a lawyer to help me file at the next level..I have been told that there are not to many lawyers that handle VA Cases..and the ones I have talked to said that they can't take the case until it goes to the appeal level...(still new to all this) ...so this change would be good to those who have no clue to what they are doing (like me) and are at the mercy of Service Organizations in a small town that can't seem to keep one longer then 4 months...I am so glad that the one service rep gave me this web site before she left...it has been a God Send...Thank to all of you...believe me when I say...YOU DO MAKE A DIFFERANCE...the silent warriors...helping those in need.

I think having a lawyer for things like 1151 claims and CUE type claims would be good if the lawyers really understand these claims. I would like to be able to just have a real expert look at my claim and tell me if it will fly and what can be done to make it fly. If the claim is DOA then I don't have to waste my time on it. If I show the CUE to the lawyer and he says this is a dead duck then I would not bother. The only way now is to just throw the dice and see what comes up. I think it will take time to train up lawyers to do CUE type claims and other complicated claims. Maybe the ones who do the COVA claims now will start helping vets from the NOD stage.

this is my opinion

Having lawyers in the beginning will cause a cluster (you know what), The lawyers will not be knowledgable to handle claims and then you will have the 800lb gorillas like the DAV and American Legion trying to limit what they can do. You will also have lots of increases in claims being re rated which will clog up the va system.

The pros:
IF the va is smart, they will save themselves the headache and rate the claims properly, with lawyers HOPEFULLY knowing the regs of the va, they will be able to do things that we cant, and last but not least we will finally have somebody fighting for us and our best interest.

Remeber folks when we have lawyers it will be crazy in the beginning but hopefully things will get better. I also hope that the va will stop thinking that all vets are DumbA***s.

Just my 3 cents
marinejay

Or, could it turn the VA compensation process into the SSA? They turn down most claims at first forcing applicants to refile with lawyers. Could it go the same way with the VA?

SSA has a 60 percent first denial rate, The VA is 94 to 96 %. The SSA comparison would be beneficial to Vets.

LOL, oh ok. I actually thought it was the other way around. Had no idea VA rate was so high.

I expect Terry to add more detail to this post very shortly.

Anyway I am tickled to death that we can now use attorneys. Now is the time to file a new claim and once it is denied, Call the man.

Across the nation, Veterans Service Organizations are actually sobering up planning what to do.

I have very mixed emotions about this. On the one hand I am very happy that veterans who need it, will now be able to have an attorney represent them below the court level. On the other hand I can see the implementation of this as a major slow-down to an already painstakenly slow claims process. Plus, Steve Buyer pushed this through, and I don't trust that maggot any further than I could throw him.

Dear Fellow Veterans & Friends

just remember. because we have the right to hire a lawyer. Does not mean lawyers will take our cases. I expect allot of cherry picking going on and hard cases that could win will not get the lawyers attenton.
I dont see a back log problem because of lawyers. But if there is. its because they see they can win and the VA screwy undefensibel rulings are the real cause of a back log. Would any of you begrudge a veteran or his lawyer who is going to try to right decades of wrong. As far as im concern. Im willing to wait at the end of the line to give these guys the right to have there claims properly reviewed.
Lawyers dont get paid unless they win. They will be very conservitive with there time and tallents making sure the claiims they spend there time with pays off.
Furthermore I belive the VA's best friend in screwing up our claims is the vets themselfs. So much is allowed to fall through the cracks because the vet does not hold the VA feet to the fire. The lawyers will catch all these dirty claim tricks and fix them. IF the VA wont follow the law at the RO level. the courts are going to hear about it from professionals who know what the VA is doing and can explain how the VA does it.

Terry Higgins

Source please for the 94-96 % first submission denial?

Cynical by nature, I am sorely tempted to question why "rats" like Buyer and Craig have all of a sudden pushed thru something that seems to favor Vets?

looking at the Vets issues voting records of either of these snakes (on the Va Watchdog site}, really has me suspicious. Could it be under the table money from some big lawyers association? I thought those guys were all in Democrats pockets because of the Repubs attitude towards tort reform!!!!!

at any rate it "appears" to be a step forward. Got to figure it will be a stiff learning curve for us and for the new "experts' for a while when the change comes about in June.

[quote name='fla_viking' post='34837' date='Dec 15 2006, 09:28 PM']
Dear Fellow Veterans & Friends


Terry,

some good points in your message. Having used a lawyer from the git go on my successful SSDI claim I think one of the chief advantages once enuf lawyers learn the VA rules, will be that the lawyer who knows his way around the block will tell a Vet up front if he really has a case. Please notice i emphasize the lawyers knowledge of the VA system. Unfortunately this knowledge will come only with experience and some early users (us) may suffer.

I still believe that most of the delays we suffer are due to tasking too many semi trained folks with a very complicated process. Add to that the possiblilty the best and brightest dont necessarily flock to federal government work and as well, a kind of grudging acceptance by congress and various administrations, of the need to spend money on us Vets, and you have a screwed up process. After all, the defense dept hasnt yet figured out how to get bulletproof vests and proper armor to the folks in Iraq!!!!!

I think Buyer and Craig pushed the lawyer thing to weaken the VSO's. The only reason any vet joins a service organization is usually if they have a claim.

I take a lawyer over a vso anyday.

I agree with Calnight, how could we possibly be any worse off with a lawyer! He may not know it all, but at least, we would stand a better chance of understanding the Va. Sxxx than we do now.

I wish that I had had the opportunity to have had a lawyer from the beginnning and then at least, I feel that I would have had a half way chance of understanding the Va.

The Va is so full of it, with their unspoken laws and lies.

The Va may also decide to hire doctors that do C&P's and to write down what they read in a veterans file and not what they want it to say.

When the R.O tells a Va. doctor to place lies into your examination, then you spend half of your life, trying to prove that they are liars.

Bring them on!!

Josephine

I never had a good experience with a VSO. There was a GOOD VSO with the DAV in my Regional Office which is 180 miles away, I never used him, but several friends did. He knew HOW to write a claim, wasn't afraid to stand up for the Veteran, he was one that is far and few between in the system. Of course, he was fired by the DAV for getting too many claims approved, the DAV had a huge Office inside the VARO and he was told, "we can't afford to lose our space". I agree 100% with the use of Attorney's, but in my opinion, there's a great side affect that's going to be around for a long time. 1. I don't know of ANY Attorney (even in a city the size of Memphis, TN) who specializes or even knows 1/4 as much about VA regs, laws etc as some of the people on this Board. I have personally been called about some VA regs by Congressional Aides and by one Attorney who thought he could be paid by a veteran to represent the veteran at the Regional level, this just shows the current level of ignorance of Veterans Laws by Attorneys. 2. How many local Attorney's are going to fly to Washington if your case goes that far, I feel the VA has grown accustomed to being a "law of their own, not bound by any Precedents, or by any Regs for that matter." How many of you have quoted the regs only to have the VA ignore them???? It's going to take a long time to change the attitude of the VA AND the attitude of the Veterans Service Organizations....they were the reason the new law was changed to NOT allow attorneys represent the vet from the beginning of his claim! 3. Local Attorneys have been locked out of the system for so long, that it's going to take a long time to get them up to speed on Vets laws, and this is going to depend MAINLY on how much money they see can be made on vets claims. How many 10% - 50% claims are they going to spend time on??? BOTTOM LINE is MONEY.
Having said all this, I still think that being able to hire an attorney will be good for veterans who don't know vet's regs and especially those who have been screwed for years. Bottom line is that all of us here on HadIt and those who work silently helping vets in their own communities are still going to be needed for a long time. I don't post much on the Claims Research because there are so many who are already doing a good job there. I always have at least 2 vets locally that I'm working their claims, and it has become a really stressful duty as a lot of you understand, when I get involved in a claim, it takes a whole lot mentally out of me and does cause my PTSD symptoms to flare. I would love to be able to just turn it over to an Attorney, but ask one sometimes about a particular VA reg and watch the blank stare on his face. I'm going to keep doing what I'm doing as long as I can, maybe someday the Attorneys will jump on this just as they are now so many Social Security Attorneys. Just my opinion!

Jay said:
"Having lawyers in the beginning will cause a cluster (you know what"

I think that is possible -unless these lawyers join hadit ---to get up to speed on the regs-

and I agree with Terry:


"Does not mean lawyers will take our cases. I expect allot of cherry picking going on and hard cases that could win will "

You have to present a claim that they are willing to take on-
meaning make sure they know you have lots of medical evidence-

Countless NY lawyers would not help me on my FTCA case-which I won myself-
they said I didn't have a chance-but wouldn't consider the evidence- Ha!

An SSA lawyer refused to support our reconsideration request=

3 months later I called him and told him he lost about 4 pr 5 thousand dollars-out of the retro-

He was shocked and said maybe he did not understand how disabling PTSD was-
he didnt---

actually I am calling him Monday -if he is still around-to see if he is able to handle VA cases-in spite of his lack of support on our SSA matter-he showed a willingness to comprehend VA regs-

I am calling my personal attorney and a few other lawyers I know to see if they will be handling veterans claims-


I certainly expect-as others have mentioned here-

that a good lawyer will often want you to get a good IMO right from the git-go-

if you already have an IMO and solid medical evidence-however-they may not suggest another one-

I think these vet orgs are quite worried and again- a good lawyer- in my opinion (this is what I would do in their shoes)
will look first for

1. Any FTCA or Section 1151 potential,

2. access and present all evidence to support the current claim,

3. see if there has been any monetary damage caused by past vet reps on the POA,

4. and look for any CUE potential in past denials that were not appealed.

In each of these scenarios there is potential money- and this is a motivation unlike these vet reps have-
because whether they are lousy or wonderful they still get paid.

I never had a good experience with a VSO. There was a GOOD VSO with the DAV in my Regional Office which is 180 miles away, I never used him, but several friends did. He knew HOW to write a claim, wasn't afraid to stand up for the Veteran, he was one that is far and few between in the system. Of course, he was fired by the DAV for getting too many claims approved, the DAV had a huge Office inside the VARO and he was told, "we can't afford to lose our space". I agree 100% with the use of Attorney's, but in my opinion, there's a great side affect that's going to be around for a long time. 1. I don't know of ANY Attorney (even in a city the size of Memphis, TN) who specializes or even knows 1/4 as much about VA regs, laws etc as some of the people on this Board. I have personally been called about some VA regs by Congressional Aides and by one Attorney who thought he could be paid by a veteran to represent the veteran at the Regional level, this just shows the current level of ignorance of Veterans Laws by Attorneys. 2. How many local Attorney's are going to fly to Washington if your case goes that far, I feel the VA has grown accustomed to being a "law of their own, not bound by any Precedents, or by any Regs for that matter." How many of you have quoted the regs only to have the VA ignore them???? It's going to take a long time to change the attitude of the VA AND the attitude of the Veterans Service Organizations....they were the reason the new law was changed to NOT allow attorneys represent the vet from the beginning of his claim! 3. Local Attorneys have been locked out of the system for so long, that it's going to take a long time to get them up to speed on Vets laws, and this is going to depend MAINLY on how much money they see can be made on vets claims. How many 10% - 50% claims are they going to spend time on??? BOTTOM LINE is MONEY.
Having said all this, I still think that being able to hire an attorney will be good for veterans who don't know vet's regs and especially those who have been screwed for years. Bottom line is that all of us here on HadIt and those who work silently helping vets in their own communities are still going to be needed for a long time. I don't post much on the Claims Research because there are so many who are already doing a good job there. I always have at least 2 vets locally that I'm working their claims, and it has become a really stressful duty as a lot of you understand, when I get involved in a claim, it takes a whole lot mentally out of me and does cause my PTSD symptoms to flare. I would love to be able to just turn it over to an Attorney, but ask one sometimes about a particular VA reg and watch the blank stare on his face. I'm going to keep doing what I'm doing as long as I can, maybe someday the Attorneys will jump on this just as they are now so many Social Security Attorneys. Just my opinion!

Craig and Buyer did this for one reason.

Voters are begining to ask about taking care of veterans.

Niether one will of the two will vote to fully fund the VA. So to give the impression that they are looking out for the veteran, they get on the bandwagon to an issue that needs no funding.

Several months ago I was in Craig's local office with my c-file in hand, a stack of denial letters, and copy of U.S. Code. I show'd them the VA broke the Law no less than 17 times to deny my claim, according to MY interpretation of the law. I pointed out that I'm not allowed to hire an attorney to interpret the law for me. I asked if they were willing to do so. Of course they could not. I was also writing letters to the local paper about Craig's Voting record against veterans. Craig personaly replied to the letter in the paper, telling the people he had done this or that for veterans. (none that included funding the VA) A couple of months later and he introduces the lawyer legislation.

Notice all of Craig and Buyers good deeds for veterans has no cost to the gov. attached.

Time

The AL, VFW, DAV, and other Veterans Service Organizations howled long enough , about this bill that congress felt obligated, that these service organizations, would no longer have a place to nestled quietly and secluded from oversight.

The VSO's office space, office equipment, security, and software access comes from the VA and VA budget. I only saw two Veteran Service Organizations, that were for the Veteran's Lawyer bill during the senate hearing. One of these was the VVA (Vietnam Veterans of America), can't remember the other.. maybe (PVA)... http://www.vva.org/

I can remember very well the DAV's opposition to the bill. DAV, has gotten me nothing for 30+ years. Five years ago, when I first started my claims again, it took me over a year to make the DAV understand that MOS was army and that NEC was Navy... http://www.dav.org/ ....read of DAV's opposition to Veterans Lawyers 2/3 down the page.

When a PTSD Vet comes home wandering into the VAMC, the VA Mental Health doctor will ask him, "Do you want to be called crazy for the rest of your life?"

Veteran answers: NO.

Doctor, waits a few minutes, and then ask these questions, demanding an answers upon his return.

[1] Do you want the stigma, of this mental illness to follow you for the rest of your life?
or
[2] Do you want to try to go ahead and try to work?

The doctor will leave the room for about 10 minutes, and the come back, asking what the mentally ill Veterans answer is. The Veteran will invariably answer #2 every time enthusiastically. That was what VA Doctors asked in 1972. The Vet was a pin cushion.

If I ask you heads or tails? Then 80% of the time, you will answer heads, taking for granted that the person tossing the coin, is 'honorable'. A lawyer needs to hear these questions that VA Doctors ask the Veteran, within the first two years of release from active duty.

A Lawyer needs to initiate the disability Claim, for the Veterans protection, under the law.
I hope that I do not seem to bitter for hadit. I just won't stop here.

What gets me is that I could not find this news about hiring lawyers on any major vet org web site-

of course they dont want this news to get out-

but it is getting all over the electronic veteran's community anyhow!

Question: Doesn't the President have to sign off on this before it becomes law. I don't hold out much hope for this passing if he does.

I would have LOVED to have had a lawyer back in 1970 when I was lowballed at 10%. Then I might not have had a thirty-year running battle to eventually get 100% P&T IU.

Another Question: With the GAO instructing the VA to go back and review IU vets, shouldn't we be able to hire a lawyer right off (after June) to defend ourselves? It's way after the claim, denial, NOD portion of the process.

jaz

This is a post that I posted on another post topic. Evidently Tbird has devoted a "new catogory" to the
VA lawyer issue. Anyway I moved the question here. If anyone has knowledge.please.

If anyone knows,


Would someone comment on how they interpret the new legislation about when the attorney can get involved with the claim. Is is after the claim is filed and the veteran receives the VCAA notice on what needs to be done? Or is it if the veteran is denied and has to appeal?

Also, can a veteran hire an attorney from any state so if I lived in Washington State and hired an attorney from Maine its good as long as the attorney is licensed in his own state. Is this correct?

Thank you,

Jangrin

Yes, the president does have to sign this. I am quite sure that if the President vetoed this bill, that the bill would get a super-majority of congress to over-ride the veto. At this time the President could not take the chance of being over-ridden by congress. The president should sign this bill before Feb.

in answer to your question.it is after you recieve the denial letter and when you need the NOD.The atty can even file the NOD for you.You can hire any atty that is licensed so long as he meets VA criteria which I read as simple vet law training,no more than an SO is rrequired to have.this will all commence in June.

You can get a lawyer from Washington D.C., if you like.

(h) Effective Date- The amendments made by subsections [c](1) and (d) shall take effect on the date that is 180 days after the date of the enactment of this Act and shall apply with respect to services of agents and attorneys that are provided with respect to cases in which notices of disagreement are filed on or after that date.

(i) Limitation on Collection of Fee Assessment- No assessments on fees may be collected under paragraph (6) of section 5904(a) of title 38, United States Code (as added by subsection (a)(1)(D) of this section), until the date on which the Secretary of Veterans Affairs prescribes the regulations required by the amendments made by this section.

There doesn't seem to be any mention of Veterans Lawyers in Buyers discription of the bill although it is the very First issue dealt with in the bill.

TITLE 1---Attorney Representation Matters
Section 101. Agent or attorney representation in Veterans Benefits cases before the Department of Veterans Affairs.

President signs $3.2 billion bill enhancing veterans’ benefits and health care (December 22, 2006) Washington, D.C. -
President Bush today signed legislation that will improve benefits and health care for America’s veterans and their families along a broad front.
http://veterans.house.gov/

This is congressman Buyer's last stand, to say that he was trying to doing something for Veterans as the leader of the Veterans Affairs Committee.

OK Shipmates. Where has this topic gone?

Telephonically, today, the questioned answered was the same amount as before the claim went in. Haven't yet received SOC, but I already know what it's gonna be in regard o these characters (VA).

I need valid input on getting the form, the 'link' to the instructions on how to file, blah, blah.

Appreciate all in advance.

The VAwatchdog says a backroom deal has already been made to repeal the lawyers for vets law. The Watchdog says the DAV is already gloating about defeating this new law. Makes you wonder whose side the
DAV is really on? I think the leardership of the DAV is on their own side. I suggest if this is so that every disabled vet return their membership card to the DAV with an explanation. I want to see the DAV's fingerprints on any amendment that repeals the lawyers for vets law.

[quote name='john999' date='Jan 9 2007, 06:15 PM' post='37141']
The VAwatchdog says a backroom deal has already been made to repeal the lawyers for vets law.

The 'link' for continuity

http://vawatchdog.org/

Its a good heads up but it has not happened yet. The DAV is looking out for its own interests not for veterans. I really don't see why they would object there would still be plenty of work for their Service Officers and it would take some of the heat off them.

'Monies' to pay the attorney's (representing the Vet) would come from the funding already being given to both these 'advocacy groups' by the VA. THUS, 'theirs' (in $'s) would be then be REDUCED as then also would be their 'prestige' and thus their 'power' on the Hill.

THIS link might provide some further clues to those interested:

http://www.opensecrets.org/

THIS link is to follow the legislative process:

http://thomas.loc.gov/

Anthony Principi,

http://www.opensecrets.org/revolving/rev_s...ry.asp?id=34092