WASHINGTON, D.C. – U.S. Senator Angus King, a member of the Senate Veterans Affairs Committee, is joining a group of bipartisan colleagues in calling on the Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) to step up its protections for veterans against predatory scammers looking to cash in on their hard-earned benefits. In a letter to VA Secretary Denis McDonough, the lawmakers urge the department to enforce existing protections for veterans filing for disability benefits. They also request additional resources to hold bad actors accountable for scamming veterans.

Senator King is a cosponsor of bipartisan legislation, the Governing Unaccredited Representatives Defrauding (GUARD) VA Benefits Act that would create criminal penalties for organizations charging unauthorized fees to help veterans file disability claims with the VA – an action prohibited under current law, but one that does not carry any criminal charges.

“With the PACT Act providing the largest expansion of veterans’ benefits in decades, veterans are increasingly becoming the targets of predatory, quasi-legal claims consultants,” the lawmakers wrote in a letter to VA Secretary Denis McDonough. “The Department must exercise every enforcement tool at its disposal and request those it needs to better protect veterans from bad actors looking to take advantage of them.”

Current law prohibits individuals and businesses from assisting a veteran in the preparation, presentation, or prosecution of a VA claim unless they are accredited through the VA. Additionally, under current law, fees for assistance may only be charged after the VA makes a decision on an initial claim. However, the VA and other federal agencies are limited in their ability to enforce the law because criminal penalties were eliminated from the statute nearly 20 years ago.

The lawmakers continued, “Our mission is to protect veterans and ensure they are not paying unqualified individuals to receive their benefits. As co-sponsors of the GUARD VA Benefits Act to reinstate criminal penalties, we believe VA must enforce the law and protect veterans from unaccredited individuals looking at veterans as a payday. Veterans shouldn’t have to turn to outside consultants to work through the initial claims process.”

Continuing their efforts to protect veterans’ benefits, the lawmakers pressed the VA to look into what else the Department can do to help protect veterans and their hard earned benefits. They also asked the VA to clarify its position on what protections are given to veterans who are choosing to pay for assistance from consultants, especially on contracts where a veteran agrees to pay a product of the increase in future benefits.

The lawmakers conclude their letter by writing: “Maintaining the current status quo is not an option for our veterans who risked their lives to defend our country. We cannot allow unaccredited individuals to target veterans offering them access to VA benefits for a price. We appreciate your attention to our request, and look forward to working with VA on solutions to help protect veterans and keep their hard-earned benefits where they belong.”

Since his appointment to the Senate Veterans Affairs Committee earlier this year, Senator King has worked to ensure America’s veterans receive their earned benefits and that the VA is properly implementing various programs, such as the PACT Act and the John Scott Hannon Act. Senator King hopes to help improve the Department’s capacity by investing in its workforce, facilities, and other modernization efforts.

The letter was also signed by additional Senate sponsors of the GUARD VA Benefits Act, including Senate Veterans’ Affairs Committee Chairman Jon Tester, John Fetterman (D-Pa.), Jacky Rosen (D-Nev.), Sheldon Whitehouse (D-R.I.), Michael Bennet (D-Colo.), Peter Welch (D-VT), Sherrod Brown (D-Ohio), Jeanne Shaheen (D-N.H.), John Hickenlooper (D-Colo.), Jack Reed (D-R.I), James Risch (R-Idaho), Mike Crapo (R-Idaho), Mark Kelly (D-Ariz.), Ben Ray Lujan (D-N.M.), Bernie Sanders (I-Vt.), Ron Wyden (D-Ore.), Maggie Hassan (D-N.H.), Mike Braun (R-Ind.), Elizabeth Warren (D-Mass.), John Boozman (R-Ark.), Richard Blumenthal (D-Conn.), and Lindsey Graham (R-S.C.).

Read the lawmakers’ full letter HERE or below.

+++

Dear Secretary McDonough,

We write today to inquire about the Department of Veterans Affairs’ (VA) enforcement of existing protections for veterans seeking assistance with filing initial claims for benefits and what resources are needed to enhance protections at the federal level. With the Sergeant First Class Heath Robinson Honoring Our Promise to Address Comprehensive Toxics (PACT) Act of 2022 providing the largest expansion of veterans’ benefits in decades, veterans are increasingly becoming the targets of predatory, quasi-legal claims consultants. The Department must exercise every enforcement tool at its disposal and request those it needs to better protect veterans from bad actors looking to take advantage of them.

Veterans are increasingly facing more scams targeting them and their hard-earned VA benefits. The Federal Trade Commission (FTC) testified during an April 19, 2023, Senate Veterans’ Affairs Committee hearing Veterans Consumer Protection: Preventing Financial Exploitation of Veterans and their Benefits, its reporting network received more than 150,000 complaints of fraud and illegal business practices in 2022, resulting in more than $414 million in damages.

This was an increase of more than 50 percent from the previous year. Additionally, VA testified more than 40 percent of all complaints received by veterans from 2018 to 2022 were against unaccredited individuals. We passed the PACT Act last year to provide toxic-exposed veterans their earned VA care and benefits. We did not expand benefits as a way for unaccredited scammers to profit from veterans.

While veterans should never have to pay to get the benefits they have earned, we are faced with the reality that many veterans are choosing to pay for assistance filing for benefits.

Consequently, VA needs to clarify its position and what protections are afforded to veterans in contracts for assignment of future benefits. Recently, VA’s Office of General Counsel (OGC) provided views to the Senate Committee staff articulating a contract between a veteran and individual, based on the increase in benefits, is an assignment of benefits, in violation of section 5301 of title 38. Specifically, OGC suggested that in a scenario where a veteran enters into a contract for four times the monthly increase in future benefits, it would be a violation of section 5301(a)(3)(C) specifically, which states “Any agreement or arrangement for collateral for security for an agreement that is prohibited under subparagraph (A) is also prohibited and is void from its inception.” Furthermore, VA provided technical views on H.R. 1822, the Preserving Lawful Utilization of Services (PLUS) for Veterans Act of 2023, stating VA is opposed to a fee structure calculated as a product of five times the monthly increase of future benefits. However, VA did not mention in its technical assistance whether it considered this fee

structure a violation of the assignment of benefits, as it did in its response to the Senate Committee staff. This is a discrepancy in an interpretation that must be made clear.

As VA testified at the April 19, Senate Veterans’ Affairs Committee hearing, and an April 27, 2022, House Veterans’ Affairs Committee hearing, Ensuring Quality Representation in the Veteran Benefits Claims Process, VA has oversight over non-accredited individuals assisting with claims but few enforcement authorities to protect veterans. For the past few years VA has asked for re-instatement of criminal penalties for those who assist with claims outside VA’s accreditation scheme. We have attempted to pass these enforcement mechanisms, but efforts have stalled the last three Congresses. Furthermore, VA argues the only redress is to send a cease-and-desist letter to the individual or company informing them of their non-compliance with statute and refer the case to state law enforcement. However, we would like to know if there is anything else, short of re-instating criminal penalties, which can be done to help protect veterans and help keep their earned benefits where they belong, in the pockets of veterans.

Our mission is to protect veterans and ensure they are not paying unqualified individuals to receive their benefits. As co-sponsors of the Governing Unaccredited Representatives Defrauding (GUARD) VA Benefits Act to re-instate criminal penalties, we believe VA must enforce the law and protect veterans from unaccredited individuals looking at veterans as a payday. Veterans shouldn’t have to turn to outside consultants to work through the initial claims process. We want to know what, if anything, VA is doing to ensure veterans are not overwhelmed filing initial claims. We do not want to limit a veteran’s ability to seek help, we are simply trying to guarantee, when a veteran seeks assistance, they can trust that the individual meets the highest ethical and professional standards and they will not have to give up their hard- earned benefits to access VA.

Given the current state of affairs where unaccredited individuals continue to charge veterans for assistance, we respectfully ask VA to respond to the following inquires no later than October 30, 2023.

1. What is VA’s official position on contracts in which a veteran agrees to pay a product of the increase in future benefits?
2. If the above contracts are a violation of the assignment of benefits under section 5301 of title 38, what if any remedy or enforcement is there? Is it limited to civil enforcement by the veteran?
3. If VA believes these contracts are a violation of assignment of benefits, why is VA not enforcing that law on existing contracts?
4. Has VA ever sent a cease-and-desist letter to an individual or company for assignment of benefits in a contract?
5. Without re-instating criminal penalties for violating VA’s accreditation scheme, what else can VA do aside from sending a cease-and-desist letter and or referring it to a state law enforcement agency?
6. Is there anything VA can do without further legislation to enforce its accreditation?
7. What is VA’s definition of preparation, presentation, and prosecution of claims?
8. At what point does third party medical evidence become preparation of a claim?
9. Do medical providers need to become accredited if they are assisting with medical evidence as part of an initial claim?
10. What consequences does VA see if Congress authorized accreditation for assistance with initial claims?
11. Does VA believe the above consequences outweigh continuing without criminal penalties?
12. How many letters has VA sent to unaccredited individuals and companies since January 2023?
13. Have any of those letters resulted in the ending of an illegal practice?
14. What resources short of re-instatement of penalties does VA need to prevent unaccredited individuals from contracting with veterans?

Maintaining the current status quo is not an option for our veterans who risked their lives to defend our country. We cannot allow un-accredited individuals to target veterans offering them access to VA benefits for a price. Every day we continue to allow this market to flourish, veterans are losing money. We appreciate your attention to our request, and look forward to working with VA on solutions to help protect veterans and keep their hard-earned benefits where they belong.

Sincerely,

###