Legal Meets Practical: Accessible Solutions

Archive for July, 2016

VA VetBiz System on Hiatus in August

UPDATE: Via a release issued today (August 5), the CVE has shortened the announced “down” time by one week. According to the latest news, the system will only be on hiatus until Monday, August 15th. This is good news for those going through reverification and getting close to expiration.

For those of you who are going through the reverification or verification process to be included in the U.S. Department of Veterans Affairs’ (VA) VetBiz Registry (its database of small business contractors eligible for veteran-owned and service-disabled veteran-owned set-asides), you might want to get a move on.

Commencing at 8:00 a.m. on Thursday, August 11th, and ending at 8:00 a.m. on Monday, August 22nd, the VetBiz system will be down. During this period, firms will not have access to their profiles and the CVE will not be able to process applications. Firms will not be able to commence the reverification process or submit a change request to modify any aspect of the firm’s profile/status. Additionally, the CVE will be unable to accept new verification applications.

In a notice sent out in mid-July to firms already in the VetBiz Registry, the CVE encouraged firms whose eligibility expires before October 15, 2016 – and firms that desire to update their information – to take action as soon as possible, as the CVE will not grant any extensions of eligibility due to this temporary hiatus.

This comes at an unfortunate time, as this is the end of the Government’s fiscal year, when contract solicitations and awards increase. Also, the notice was sent out only three weeks in advance of the hiatus.

So, why the need? According to the email blast: “The VA Veterans First verification program is undergoing a transformation in response to feedback provided by Veteran-owned Small Businesses. The modifications and enhancements will result in significant changes to our application process to improve the Veteran experience as we establish “My VA Verification.””

I’m not sure if the explanation given could be more vague, but I did some digging to find out what constitutes “My VA Verification.” Apparently, the VA is changing the examination phases of the application process, now requiring firms to go through a “pre-qualification” stage before undergoing a comprehensive evaluation.

As an attorney who regularly assists with these applications, I will say I’m not too thrilled with this development. A few years ago, the CVE was making some serious headway in making the application process easier; but requiring a company to go through both “pre-qualification” and an actual examination amplifies the work and complexity for both the CVE and the firm. Also, for those who have gone through the process already, and learned from trial and error, they might not be too happy to now have to master another process.

There are good intentions here, but we’ll see about execution. If you want to take a look at My VA Verification and offer your comments below based on your experience, please chime in!

*Did you find this article informative? If so, sign up for Sarah Schauerte’s legal blog on veteran issues at: https://legalmeetspractical.com.

UnderConstruction_cones

Vets: Beware IRS Phone Scam!

While my blog’s focused on veterans, this is one issue that can affect anyone with a phone and a social security number.

Recently, scammers have taken to calling individuals under the guise of being “officers employed by the Internal Revenue Service.” Initially, not even a live person calls – even if you pick up the phone, you’re treated to a one-minute recording where you’re told to call back the number. They also threaten the following:

“The IRS has issued an arrest warrant on you. Right now, you and your physical property both are being monitored. And it’s very important that I do hear back from you as soon as possible before we proceed further in any legal matter,” the voicemail says (or some variation thereof).

There are a few things wrong with this assertion:

  1. There are no officers with the IRS who would be criminally prosecuting you. It’s not the IRS who arrests/investigates those engaged in tax fraud – it’s the U.S. Department of Justice (though investigations start with an IRS special agent).
  2. If a U.S. government agency was prosecuting you, they wouldn’t initiate the matter by calling you and leaving a voicemail.
  3. If the IRS suspected you of tax evasion/fraud, they’d send you written correspondence first.
  4. The IRS would never make the threats contained in the voicemail, such as representing it will send local law enforcement agents to your door or levy your property.

If you do get on the phone with “Officer X,” he will try to scare you into asking for personal information such as debit card information and social security numbers. Hopefully obviously, never give that kind of information to a stranger on the phone! Especially not to a Special Human like this. Honestly, now – this isn’t even a smart scam.

I received such a call today, and when I Googled “IRS phone scam,” I found that this is a very recent phenomenon. If you find yourself at the receiving end of a call like this, you can add your number on the National Do Not Call List at http://www.donotcall.gov. Also, report the details and the phone number that called you by emailing [email protected]. (The number that called me was 254-488-6064).

Like dealing with the IRS isn’t stressful enough. We don’t need to be dealing with an IRS phone scam, too.

*Did you find this article informative? If so, sign up for Sarah Schauerte’s legal blog on veteran issues at: https://legalmeetspractical.com.

Don't give this dummy your money!

       Don’t give this dummy your money!

 

Vet Games VA System, Taxpayers Lose

Considering how long it takes – and how hard it can be – to make the U.S. Department of Veterans (“VA”) fork over rightfully-deserved disability benefits, this story, released via a VA press release, is mind-boggling:

On June 30th, Bruce A. Endicott, 34, pled guilty in federal court to theft of government funds, and admitted he committed the theft over a course of more than three years.

According to court records, Endicott began receiving service-connected disability benefits through the VA in 2005.

In June 2012, Endicott filed an additional claim with the VA for Individual Unemployability (“IU”) benefits, claiming he was unemployed and unable to be employed due to his service-connected disabilities that included physical and mental impairments. Endicott also submitted a statement to the VA in February 2013, that stated he had not worked within the past 12 months.

In fact, Endicott was currently working at the Oregon Department of Justice under a second social security number that he had not disclosed to the VA. Based on Endicott’s false statements and concealments, the VA awarded him additional benefits and advised him to notify the VA immediately if he became employed.

Endicott left the Oregon Department of Justice in December of 2013 and began working for the Deschutes County District Attorney’s Office. He again failed to notify the VA he was working.

After Endicott left the District Attorney’s Office in May 2014, he applied for welfare benefits through the Oregon Department of Human Services (DHS), using the second social security number and claiming to have no income. Endicott failed to disclose to DHS that he was receiving approximately $2,700 per month in VA benefits. DHS awarded him Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program (SNAP) (formerly known as food stamps) and Temporary Assistance to Needy Family (TANF) benefits.

In February 2015, Endicott submitted a statement to the VA regarding his IU claim, in which he failed to disclose his former employment with the Deschutes County District Attorney’s Office, and asserted that he had not worked in the past 12 months. Consequently, the VA continued to pay his IU benefits.

Between June 2012 and October 2015, Endicott received approximately $47,947 in IU benefits, $5,996 in SNAP benefits, and $2,770 in TANF benefits to which he was not entitled. As a consequence of these transgressions, which were eventually discovered and prosecuted, he entered into a plea agreement stating that the government will seek a 30-day term of imprisonment. (A federal district judge will determine his actual sentence).

Notably absent from the VA’s press release is a mention of the money. If Endicott has managed to exchange 30 days in prison for this amount, this means that this is $55,000 down the drain – money that could have gone toward veterans actually entitled to service-connected compensation. This is an insulting conclusion to a saga that has surely already cost taxpayers tens of thousands of dollars in investigatory and legal process fees.

It is also a baffling one. Ask most veterans who have applied for disability benefits, and they will recount stories of years-long delays and their perception that the VA presumes they are not entitled to their benefits until they prove otherwise. So, then, how did Endicott manage to game the system?

Maybe this just came down to a technicality with the differing social security numbers. But Endicott’s game is now over, and no one won.

Money_Drain

*Did you find this article informative? If so, sign up for Sarah Schauerte’s legal blog on veteran (and veteran small business) issues at: https://legalmeetspractical.com.

Mission Statement

My mission is to provide accessible, high-quality legal services to small business owners and to veterans. I will strive to clearly communicate, understand objectives, and formulate and execute effective legal solutions.

Disclaimer

No Attorney-Client Relationship

This website is maintained exclusively for informational purposes. It is not intended to provide legal or other professional advice and does not necessarily represent the opinions of the lawyer or her clients. Viewing this site, using information from it, or communicating with Sarah Schauerte through this site by email does not create an attorney-client relationship.

Non-Reliance

Online readers should not act nor decline to act, based on content from this site, without first consulting an attorney or other appropriate professional. Because the law changes frequently, this website's content may not indicate the current state of the law. Nothing on this site is meant to predict or guarantee future results. I am not liable for the use or interpretation of information contained on this website, and expressly disclaim all liability for any actions you take or fail to take, based on this website's content.

Links

I do not necessarily endorse and am not responsible for content accessed through this website's links to other Internet resources. Correctness and adequacy of information on those sites is not guaranteed, and unless otherwise stated, I am not associated with such linked sites.

Contacting Me

You may email me through the email address provided by this site, but information you send through email or this website is not secure and may not be confidential. Communications will not be treated as privileged unless I already represent you. Do not send confidential information until you have established a formal attorney-client relationship with me. Even if I represent you, please understand that email security is still uncertain and that you accept all risks of such uncertainty and potential lack of confidentiality when you send us unencrypted, sensitive, or confidential email. Email from me never constitutes an electronic signature, unless it expressly says so.