VA DISABILITY & DIVORCE - VA refuses to enforce the Law

[DoggyDaddy]

VA DISABILITY & DIVORCE:   United States Code, Title 38, Veteran’s Benefits, is the governing document created by the U.S. Congress for the administration and protection of benefits, entitlements, and healthcare services earned by persons honorably discharged from the U.S. military, spouses, dependents, and widows of former military personnel. The Department of Veterans Affairs is the sole agency responsible for enforcement and interpretation of the contents of USC, Title 38. According to the Department of Justice, the ultimate responsibility for all actions taken/or not taken under USC, Title 38 falls squarely on the shoulders of the Secretary of the Department of Veterans Affairs. One of the primary functions of USC, Title 38 is to insure persons not eligible for veterans’ benefits, entitlements, compensation, and/or medical services are not granted access to such, and veterans receiving benefits, entitlements, compensation, and/or medical services are qualified and eligible to receive said benefits. In the case of veteran’s disability compensation, these funds are paid solely to the disabled veteran for injuries incurred in the line of duty. Disability compensation is tax-exempt and not classified as ‘income’ by the IRS.  VA disability    compensation is also protected from seizure, attachment, garnishment, or levy under any legal process whatsoever.             

     USC, Title 38 reads, “Section 5301(a) - 1) Payments of benefits due or to become due under any law administered by the Secretary shall not be assignable except to the extent specifically authorized by law, and such payments made to, or on account of, a beneficiary shall be exempt from taxation, shall be exempt from the claim of creditors, and shall not be liable to attachment, levy, or seizure by or under any legal or equitable process whatever, either before or after receipt by the beneficiary. www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/html/uscode38/usc_sec_38_00005301----000-.html”. In spite of this very focused and explicate language, every day in civil court rooms across the country disabled veterans are being forced to use their earned disability compensation as a divisible asset in a divorce settlement, or go to jail for contempt. In a blatant violation of USC, Title 38, most family court attorneys and civil court judges have wrongly concluded that the federal law does not apply to them or their court proceedings. Nothing could be farther from the truth. Contrary to the opinions of some, there is no gray area here. When the federal law states; ‘under any legal or equitable process whatever, either before or after receipt by the beneficiary’, that means exactly that. USC, Title 38 makes NO exception for civil court rulings. Operation Firing For Effect (OFFE) is currently monitoring over 40 cases nationwide where severely disabled veterans are being ordered to use their earned disability compensation to pay alimony or spousal support to a non-military able body ex-spouse. In a number of these cases the disabled veteran has spent months in jail for refusing to give up their disability compensation to a third party. Operation Firing For Effect (OFFE) is a veteran’s advocacy group devoted to the improvement and protection of benefits and entitlements earned by our men and women in uniform.

     Although USC, Title 38 is extremely clear about the protection of disability compensation, the Department of Veterans Affairs refuses to enforce the laws outlined in Title 38. This inaction by the VA leaves the veteran with no other recourse but to pay the court order or go to jail. OFFE is currently warning active duty personnel (man, or woman) of the waiting ambush they face if they should fall victim to an ugly divorce upon returning home. OFFE is recommending all military personnel consider filing a premarital/prenuptial agreement designed specifically to protect veterans’ benefits from consideration as a divisible asset in a divorce. OFFE is also exploring the possibility of filing a class-action suit against the Department of Veterans Affairs for failure to enforce the federal statues that protect veteran’s benefits from third party awards. The Department of Veterans Affairs has an obligation to our veterans to protect their benefits and entitlements from abuse and theft. For more information on this issue, refer to http://jerebeery.com/5301%20Club.htm .

 http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9FAjR-QbhPw .
[Source: OFFE Release 55 dtd 11 Dec 08 ++]

• Tweet

[IJK3770]

DD,
    Thanks for posting this.  I had no idea.  It seems there are lots of ways that local judges use to punish fathers and this is just another one.
Cheerily
IIJK

• Tweet

[haikiaiki]

State court judges medical privilege, overstepping. A veteran's observation.
=
How can state court judges in violating, 38 USC 5301, 42 USC 1408, arbitrarily award as alimony, a portion of a veteran’s VA disability rated compensation, and waive away, by reviewing the disability rights of veteran whose disability rating that maybe determined and factored in as critical? Judgment as if all disabilities are exactly the same. State court judges, playing doctor, are bordering on medical negligence, overstepping those whose authority it belongs, in the practice of medicine, reevaluation, and rehabilitation of the veteran, medical professionals. In direct violation of 38 USC 1155,  “Authority for schedule for rating disabilities.” "..., n no event shall such a readjustment in the rating schedule cause a veteran's disability rating in effect on the effective date of the readjustment to be reduced unless an improvement in the veteran's disability is shown to have occurred.” Reduced readjustment in a rating schedule, is the taking away money used for the recovery and rehabilitation of disabled veterans, and handing it over to a healthy third party.
=
I now wondered, if state court judges are allowed to take away a veteran’s disability compensation without a medical license, or medical knowledge, how does the Board of Veterans Appeals, who are continually faced with determining a veteran’s disability compensation, or other medical claim, adjudicate these medical questions?
=
38 C.F.R. PART 20—BOARD OF VETERANS' APPEALS: RULES OF PRACTICE
http://law.justia.com/us/cfr/title38/38-2.0.1.1.5.html

=
§ 20.101 Rule 101. Jurisdiction of the Board.
“b Appellate jurisdiction of determinations of the Veterans Health Administration. The Board's appellate jurisdiction extends to questions of eligibility for hospitalization, outpatient treatment, and nursing home and domiciliary care; for devices such as prostheses, canes, wheelchairs, back braces, orthopedic shoes, and similar appliances; and for other benefits administered by the Veterans Health Administration. Medical determinations, such as determinations of the need for and appropriateness of specific types of medical care and treatment for an individual, are not adjudicative matters and are beyond the Board's jurisdiction. Typical examples of these issues are whether a particular drug should be prescribed, whether a specific type of physiotherapy should be ordered, and similar judgmental treatment decisions with which an attending physician may be faced.”
Authority: 38 U.S.C. 511a, 7104, 7105, 7108
=
§ 20.901 Rule 901. Medical opinions and opinions of the General Counsel.
“(d) Independent medical expert opinions. When, in the judgment of the Board, additional medical opinion is warranted by the medical complexity or controversy involved in an appeal, the Board may obtain an advisory medical opinion from one or more medical experts who are not employees of the Department of Veterans Affairs. Opinions will be secured, as requested by the Chairman of the Board, from recognized medical schools, universities, clinics, or medical institutions with which arrangements for such opinions have been made by the Secretary of Veterans Affairs. An appropriate official of the institution will select the individual expert, or experts, to give an opinion.”
Authority: 38 U.S.C. 7109
=
State court judges in awarding a veterans’ VA disability compensation as a ‘divisible asset’ in a divorce, these disability medical questions or issues are beyond his state court jurisdiction, are warranted, and required to obtain advisory medical opinion from medical experts, as required by the BVA, as well as in other civil litigation. These illegal rulings, by description, these judges can only be described as, 1. An absolute ruler 2. A ruler who governs oppressively or brutally 3. One who uses authority or power harshly. The Merriam-Webster definition of a “tyrant”.
=
More questions.  State court judges overstepping.  Judges, now rule that they have the right to award VA disability compensation to third parties. Because of this, these judges, have taken on the responsibility of a medical doctor, and ruled accordingly. Contrary to the veteran’s reliance on 38 USC 5301, and because of the disability of the veteran, they have, by their judicial proceedings determined the disabled veteran is incapable of caring for his or her own interests. .Due to this disability, and their authority as judge in ruling,  awarding of VA disability compensation to third parties, in reality, they have taken on another  responsibility, they became the veterans’ legal guardian, his ward. Another right which is not legally theirs to take. However, in one of the most published, and legally researched court case in U.S. history, the case in Schiavo v. Schiavo, had in a ruling, set the limits in determining the medical protocol question. “ Initially. The Court finds no authority recognizing as a matter of federal constitutional or statutory right that a state trail judge is required to “personally assess” a ward’s level of cognition and …responsiveness.”
=
The ruling in Schavio, as researched law, the authorization of state court judges, in judgments that involve veterans’ who are faced with the awarding to third parties their VA disability compensation, and the deprivation of life, liberty or property at the hands of the government is not found in the any authority given to state court judges. Judges who personally assess, and take away money, a compensation, purposely determined, rated, and allotted individually for the disabled veteran’s rehabilitation and recovery.
=
“A legal guardian is a person who has the legal authority (and the corresponding duty) to care for the personal and property interests of another person, called a ward. Usually, a person has the status of guardian because the ward is incapable of caring for his or her own interests due to infancy, incapacity, or disability.”
=

• Tweet

[Chris Weber 5468]

Kind of brings new light to the term of "Blood Sucking Lawyers".

• Tweet

[haikiaiki]

overstepping.

=
“Clear and substantial” major damage to federal interests occurs when, in attaching, or “considering” for any offset reason, the VA rated disability compensation benefits of disabled veterans by judges practicing in a field where they have no expertise. The expertise that VA doctors, and VA healthcare professionals are required to have in order to determine the appropriate medical procedures, and the proper disability compensation payment in order to rehabilitate, with a medical degree of certainty, that would ensure a disabled veteran return to a healthy meaningful outlook, and enjoyment of life, and independence in daily living.
=
“Clear and substantial” major damage to federal interests occurs. When the work of the primary medical care provided by Veterans Administration medical teams to disabled veterans’ has been compromised by activist state court judges. Readjusting the VA’s predetermined medical disability payment rating schedules, by court order to lower VA payout levels. Attaching these just acquired disability compensation benefit payments as alimony awards, by judges practicing in a field where they have no business practicing. Doctors do not attempt to practice law. The expertise and knowledge of VA doctors, and VA healthcare professionals are required in order to determine the appropriate medical care, and disability payment compensation in order to rehabilitate, with a medical degree of certainty, that would ensure a disabled veteran return to a healthy meaningful outlook, and enjoyment of life, and independence in daily living.

=
38 USC 1155 “In no event shall such a readjustment in the rating schedule cause a veteran's disability rating in effect on the effective date of the readjustment to be reduced unless an improvement in the veteran's disability is shown to have occurred.”
=
As described, it is overtly clear that disabled veterans “fundamental rights” through state court action, violate the 14th amendment of the U.S. Constitution, and many federal laws to protect the veteran, i.e., 38 USC 5301, 38 USC 1155, 10 USC 1408, 42 USC 659. Finally, 42 USC 1983, “Civil action for deprivation of rights.  Every person who, under color of any statute, ordinance, regulation, custom, or usage, of any State.. subjects, or causes to be subjected, any citizen of the United States… deprivation of any rights, privileges, or immunities secured by the Constitution and laws, shall be liable to the party injured in an action at law, …  or other proper proceeding for redress,..”
=
Major damage “clear and substantial” to disabled veterans.  There are two ways to stop this.
=
(1) Challenging state court judges as to their misguided belief that their knowledge of law qualifies them to practice in the field of medicine, of which they have no knowledge,  by overruling VA disability compensation decisions.  Court rulings that lack the requisite expertise to draw conclusions that test the assessment, evaluation ,and reasonableness of the weight given by VA doctors and medical professionals in allocating proper VA disability compensation payment levels.
=
(2) Because of these illegal state court actions, write to Secretary of Veterans Affairs to question those VA policies that are in violation of federal law which ignores compliance to a legal process which serves to protect the interests of the disabled veteran. Sec. 5301.“Nonassign- ability and exempt status of benefits.” Questioning why the VA continues to approve rubber stamping illegal state court ordered judgments, to reapportion, and therefore reduce a disabled veterans VA compensation payments in violation of federal law for alimony purposes, by a state court judge playing doctor?  4 USC 581.305 (c) “…the governmental entity shall inform the party who caused the legal process to be served, or the party's representative, that the legal process will not be honored.”
=
Most likely this will be turned down by the Secretary. Now, you are on your way to the Federal Court of Appeals for Veterans Claims. Your next step you will file a Notice of Disagreement (NOD) with the Secretary. The VA will deny. You then file with the Board of Veterans Affairs (BVA). As well the BVA will deny your claim. The process now gets to were you want to go, and that is the United States Court of Appeals for Veterans’ Claims. 
=

• Tweet