EENY MEENY MINEY MO

WHICH VSO CAUSED ALL MY WOE?

                     FROM THE EMERALD CITY RO AT THE                  END OF THE YELLOW BRICK ROAD

Here we go again. I try to impress on Veterans that the VSO rep is just a glorified mailman   Strike that. I lied. No only is he not a glorified one but he lacks the rudimentary “In sleet and snow and hail and rain” mentality.

We have a Vet being repped by a law dog (finally) who understands the importance of dates for filing. Mary Ann Royle is no country bumpkin and knows her stuff. Nevertheless she cannot prevail on this because the VSO stepped on their necktie before she took over the helm. I have seen this before on a claim I was helping a Vet with down in California (Cleotis) in 2006. His Rep. simply blew him off and didn’t file the Form 9 in time. He lost his filing date of 2004 and ended up with a newer one in 2008. Sucks? I think that is a masterpiece of understatement. We entrust these people to do this for us and what happens? They can’t even be bothered to take care of business. What’s more ironic is the cavalcade of excuses that tumble from their lips with no thought that they can be rebutted.

Fortunately we can narrow this down to several VSOs. At American Lake, I am very familiar with the building that houses the VSOs. I’ve been there innumerable times until I washed my hands of the turkeys. There is a MOPH, an AmLeg and a DAV office there. Which one is the criminal? Who knows. Let’s investigate. shall we?

Here’s the crime:

As to the Veteran’s next actions, the claims file contains two submissions from her, both date-stamped by the RO as having been received on April 25, 2007. The first is a hearing request dated February 22, 2007. The second is a VA Form 9 dated March 28, 2007. Both also have an unidentified “received” date stamp of April 12, 2007 in addition to the later RO date stamp. During the April 2009 hearing, the Veteran’s representative confirmed that the earlier date stamp was that of her veterans service organization. The Veteran’s representative further noted at the hearing that “there were some administrative problems with the mail runs” at the field office at the VA medical facility in American Lake and delays in getting mail from the field office to the Federal building in Seattle. The Veteran indicated that she mailed her submissions to her representative.

Yessiree, Bobby. That administrative problem. Since I am a victim of this as well, allow me to follow the bread crumbs for you. The VSO rep. takes the evidence in question to the central mail room of the building next door to the hospital. It’s located right next to the Release of Information Office in the basement. They in turn put it in Rubbermaid™ baskets and it is placed on the VA shuttle bus that travels several times a day to the Seattle VAMC. From there a courier takes all this over to the Henry M. Jackson Federal building (915 2nd Ave.) and delivers it to Clayton G. Hopperstad, GS 4 Mail and file clerk, Annual salary $38,822.00 (2010 bonus $391.00) in the mail room. I know this. He’s signed a gazillion of my Certified Mail Return Receipt Requested green cards.

I say I was a victim too. I gave my blue ink copy of my prized nexus, which the MOPH never informed me I needed, to  my representative Pat Boyer for delivery via this route in February 2008. Surprise, surprise, surprise. No nexus arrived. He went so far as to imply I never gave it to him. This is the “administrative problems” they are trying to pawn off on the VA. In this instance, and considering it happened at almost the same time, I suspect her and my representative may have been one and the same. Coincidences don’t travel in pairs. If they did we’d always get a pair dealt to us in 5 card stud.

In view of the earlier unidentified date stamps on the two submissions from the Veteran and her credible testimony that she furnished these submissions to her representative’s American Lake field office, it appears that both documents were in the possession of her representative for some period of time before being received by the RO.

This is probably the only time I will believe an employee of the VA is telling the truth. The disdain we accorded behind our backs is appalling.  Now for the panoply of pathetic pablum.

Another assertion from the Veteran concerns the applicability of the “mailbox rule” of 38 C.F.R. § 20.305 in this case. This rule does warrant consideration insofar as the postmark of the Veteran’s Substantive Appeal is not of record. The Board notes, however, that the length of time from February 8 to April 25 in 2007 was 76 days. Even when applying the “mailbox rule,” and taking into account two weekend days (April 21 and 22), there would still be a passage of 69 days, well in excess of the 60-day response period required by 38 C.F.R. § 20.302(b)(1). Moreover, while the Veteran’s representative cited to “a holiday in there” during the April 2009 hearing, the Board must point out that the only holiday in April 2007, Easter Sunday, fell on April 8. In short, the VA Form 9 was untimely even with application of the “mailbox rule.”

Below is the final nail in the coffin. This unequivocally proves the Veteran’s representative has no conception of the regulations concerning the timely submission of a Form 9:

Also, the Veteran’s representative argued that “if there was a piece of evidence to be found,” the 60-day clock should be set again. In this case, however, the Veteran submitted no evidence between February 8 and April 25 of 2007, and there was no basis for the issuance of an SSOC. As such, 38 C.F.R. § 20.302 and, as described above, VAOPGCPREC 9-97 (Feb. 11, 1997) do not apply in this instance.

Does anyone continue to cling to the idea that Congress really had our best interests in mind when they limited our representation before the VA to a bunch of uneducated chuckleheads with a smattering of CFR knowledge? Just because you have a “Certificate of Attendance” proving you were there at the VFW bar and can provide proof of the purchase of two Jack Daniels and cokes, it does not make you a leagle beagle I’d want to entrust my claim to. Oddly, it’s either this or go it alone pro se. Social Security claimants are accorded an attorney and we aren’t? Hellooooo? McFly? Now, to add insult to injury, they just legalized pot in my state. Rug-oh, Rorge . “Your honor, I think I was stoned that day week”.

Round up the usual suspects