It’s a lawsuit that could have huge implications for US veterans trying to claim veterans’ benefits: A lawsuit being heard by the Supreme Court asks the justices to rule that lower-court judges can be lenient in extending the 120-day deadline for filing appeals regarding denied claims. Although the issue might seem open and shut to some of us—let’s just do the right thing for our veterans, already—lawyers for the VA say Congress didn’t allow for judges to be flexible with the deadline. This week, Pleading Ignorance looks at the deadline issue and asks when our veterans will be treated fairly.
So, here’s the issue in a nutshell. A veteran files a claim with the VA and that claim is denied. The veteran then has 120 days to file an appeal of the denial. If he misses the 120-day deadline, he’s out of luck. His appeal won’t be heard. Okay, I know what you’re thinking: a deadline is a deadline. Don’t miss the deadline and you’re fine.
But the problem is this: veterans file claims because of health problems. Let’s say the veteran has been badly injured and is in the hospital for nine months, with no one to help him through the claims process. How is he supposed to file the claim from the hospital when there’s a chance he might not even know the claim was denied? How is he supposed to take care of the paperwork from his hospital bed?
Or, what about veterans who deal with issues such as post-traumatic stress disorder (PTSD) or other psychological problems that impair their ability to understand the deadlines or the paperwork involved? The very condition that requires them to file a claim could be what stops them from being able to submit an appeal after a denied claim.
Look, I’m not saying we should give them 10 years to file appeals. But for crying out loud, they served our country—probably for a lot longer than 120 days. Is there no way we can be flexible in dealing with veterans who have health problems that prevent them from filing an appeal in 120 days?
The case before the Supreme Court is a perfect example of the unfairness of the system. David Henderson was a Korean War veteran who was diagnosed with paranoid schizophrenia and deemed 100 percent disabled. In 2001, he applied for compensation for in-home care related to his condition. His claim was denied and his appeal was also denied because he missed the deadline by 15 days.
So, basically, we can’t give our veterans 15 days leeway when they have given us their lives.
The issue is that the appeal is heard by a judge. Lower court judges say Congress doesn’t allow them to be at all flexible in the 120-day deadline. If an appeal is filed at day 121, the circumstances don’t matter. It’s case closed, head for home, no appeal to be heard here. Henderson’s lawsuit is asking the Supreme Court to rule that lower court judges CAN be lenient in the 120-day deadline in exceptional cases—such as where circumstances make filing the appeal in 120 days impossible.
But, of course, lawyers for the VA say Congress didn’t allow for flexibility in writing the law, so it’s up to Congress to change the law. The judges’ hands are tied because the VA says that there is no legal reason to make an exception for the veterans’ deadlines.
Okay, maybe there is no LEGAL reason, but there certainly is a MORAL and an ETHICAL reason. I simply can’t believe that this is how our veterans are still being treated. It seems that they have to fight for every dollar given to them, regardless of what they’ve done for our country.
What really gets me seething about this is that the VA is supposed to advocate for veterans (I thought) and help them, yet it seems bent on nickel-and-diming them at every turn possible. Because of 15 days, one man was denied care for a condition that rendered him 100 percent disabled. And, he reportedly missed that deadline because of the very condition for which he sought help.
This goes beyond unacceptable and unfair. It borders on abuse of the very people we look to for protection in dangerous times.
In case you’re wondering, David Henderson died on October 24 of this year. His wife is now in charge of the appeal.