Citation Nr: 21076870 Decision Date: 12/28/21 Archive Date: 12/28/21 DOCKET NO. 17-00 883 DATE: December 28, 2021 ORDER Reimbursement for/repayment of loans, pursuant to Vocational Rehabilitation and Employment (VR&E) services, to include other than employment services, pursuant to 38 U.S.C. Chapter 31, is denied. FINDINGS OF FACT 1. Direct Loans received by the Veteran were not utilized to pay the Veteran's tuition, fees, books and/or supplies while attending a program of training under Chapter 31. 2. The preponderance of the evidence is against a finding that there was any contract for repayment of student loans or evidence of communication otherwise concerning repayment of the loans due and owing by VA. CONCLUSION OF LAW VA is not obligated to reimburse/repay student loans received by the Veteran while attending a program of training under Chapter 31, Title 38 of the United States Code. 38 U.S.C. § 3101; 38 C.F.R. §§ 21.70, 21.262. REASONS AND BASES FOR FINDINGS AND CONCLUSION The Veteran had honorable active duty service with the United States Army from October 1976 to May 1982. This matter is before the Board of Veterans' Appeals (Board) on appeal from a December 2010 letter of determination issued by the Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) Regional Office. The Veteran appeared at a videoconference hearing before the undersigned Veterans Law Judge (VLJ) in February 2020. A transcript of the hearing is associated with the file. This matter was previously before the Board in June 2020, April 2021, and July 2021, when it was remanded to the Agency of Original Jurisdiction (AOJ) for additional development. This matter has now returned to the Board for appellate consideration. The Board finds there has been at least substantial compliance with the Board's remand directives as the vocational rehabilitation and employment documentation has been associated with the claims file. See D'Aries v. Peake, 22 Vet. App. 97, 105 (2008); Stegall v. West, 11 Vet. App. 268, 271 (1998). Entitlement to reimbursement for/repayment of loans, pursuant to VR&E services, to include other than employment services, pursuant to 38 U.S.C. chapter 31. The purposes of Chapter 31 vocational rehabilitation benefits are to provide to eligible veterans all service and assistance necessary to enable them to achieve maximum independence in daily living and, to the maximum extent feasible, to become employable and to obtain and maintain suitable employment. 38 U.S.C. § 3101; 38 C.F.R. § 21.70. In providing assistance to a veteran for vocational rehabilitation, VA may procure and reimburse costs for training and rehabilitation services, supplies, and facilities from sources outside VA. 38 C.F.R. § 21.262. The electronic file indicates that the Veteran has been in receipt of VR&E services since 1991. See VA Treatment Records, dated December 2003. Pertinent to this matter, an Individualized Written Rehabilitation Plan (IRWP) was developed with the Veteran in June 1998. That rehabilitation plan approved the Veteran to attend school at L.A. Recording Workshop in North Hollywood for completion of a 600-hour program in Audio/Video Technology. The IWRP indicates that the services to be provided to the Veteran included tuition, fees, books, supplies, and monthly subsistence allowance. The Veteran attended L.A. Recording Workshop from 1998 to 1999. The Veteran claims entitlement to reimbursement for/repayment of loans that the Veteran asserts were utilized for VR&E purposes. Turning to the evidence, a September 1998 case note reflects that the cost of training was quoted at $5,700.00. A September 1998 letter from L.A. Recording Workshop states that they agreed to only charge VA $3,695.00 for the Video Program tuition. The letter further states that the school would allow him to take the first five weeks of the Film Program, before the Veteran determines if he wants to drop that program. At that point, the school would revert to billing VA for the Audio-Video Program only. A December 1998 case note indicates that a loan was requested in October 1998. The note states that it is a personal loan the Veteran was requesting. A January 1999 case note indicates that federal loans take a long time to disperse, especially when used for personal, not education purposes. A subsequent January 1999 case note states that the Veteran was worried about the school "stalling" him. He reported that he contacted the Direct Loan Program at the U.S. Department of Education and was told the school has the money. He stated he was informed to contact the fraud department. The notes indicate that, at that time, the total due to him from the loans was $5,174.00. After further follow-ups, a February 1999 case note indicates that the Veteran received $2,280.00 from the school through the loan. The note also indicates he was receiving his VA subsistence allowance. Subsequently, an April 1999 case note indicates the Veteran received the financial aid he was owed from student loans. Importantly, he reported he was using these loans for living expenses and planned to use a military repayment program. In October 2010, the Veteran contacted VA in reference to the Direct student loans he took out related to his education at L.A. Recording Workshop. The Veteran is requesting reimbursement for $10,875.00 in loans and fees. Importantly, the facility is no longer in business, and is operating under a new name and management. See Correspondence, dated October 2010. In a case note dated October 2010, the AOJ spoke with a representative of the new facility. They informed VA that they did not have any records from 1998 to 1999. The representative indicated that the previous owners shredded many documents. She stated, however, that the school was paid because the Veteran would not have received his certificate of completion without payment. Additionally, the AOJ, in a December 2010 memorandum, stated: "The use of financial aid is at the discretion of the [V]eteran, and is not a requirement for participation in Vocational Rehabilitation training. Given that you took out the loans at your own discretion, it is then your responsibility for payment of these loans." See also Congressionals, dated March 2011. The December 2010 memorandum noted that there were originally difficulties receiving the loan money from the school; however, the specific reasons for the delay could not be identified. Based on some notes, one of the reasons for the delay was due to the school holding the loan funds until VA paid the tuition. The memorandum notes that VA was not billed until three months after the Veteran began the program and that, shortly thereafter, the Veteran received his financial aid. As noted above, the memorandum notes that the Veteran used the student loans for living expenses. See VRE Correspondence; see also Congressionals, dated March 2011. The December 2010 memorandum memorializes the Veteran's assertion that the school fraudulently kept the student loan money, as well as the VA tuition payments. Id. In further researching the matter, the AOJ asserted that their invoices are kept for only seven years, and there is no invoice to provide evidence that the school was paid for the Veteran's training. Id. The Veteran testified that VA was not paying the school like they were supposed. See February 2020 Hearing Transcript at 3. Given that, he testified that the school's financial aid officer recommended student loans to expedite going to school. Id. He went on to testify that he had a contract with VA that entitled him to repayment of his student loans. Id at 5. Following the Veteran's assertion at the February 2020 hearing, the Board remanded the matter to attempt to obtain any such contract was entered into by either party. In November 2020, the AOJ sent a letter to the Veteran requesting the Veteran provide evidence and explain any discrepancy between the requested amount of reimbursement and the tuition charged by the educational institution. In September 2021, the AOJ again sent correspondence requesting the Veteran "provide evidence of your contract for repayment of loans, any invoices not paid to your training facilities by the VR&E program." In response, the Veteran submitted copies of records previously associated with the electronic claims file. Notably, the Veteran submitted copies of his June 1998 IWRP, various email communications, case notes, and screenshots of the CWINRS. Significantly, the Veteran the Veteran did not submit any evidence of a contract for repayment of loan or evidence of communication otherwise concerning repayment of the loans by VA. After reviewing all the relevant evidence in the veteran's file, the Board finds that VA does not owe any tuition to the Veteran's school and is not obligated to reimburse the Veteran for funds that he had to repay because of the Direct Loans he received. As noted previously, in providing assistance to a veteran for vocational rehabilitation, VA may procure and reimburse costs for training and rehabilitation services, supplies, and facilities from sources outside VA. 38 C.F.R. § 21.262. The probative evidence tends to show that this is what VA did in the present case. The Veteran sought training to become an Audio/Video Technician from an outside source (L.A. Recording Workshop). VA approved this training and agreed, as shown in his IWRP, that it would provide services to the Veteran including payment of tuition and required books and supplies. While VA invoices are kept for only seven years and, as such, no such invoices are available for review, the weight of the probative evidence of record tends to go against the claim. In support, case notes from 1998-99 indicate that the Veteran took out the direct loans for personal living expenses, not tuition. Indeed, upon review, VA determined that one of the reasons for the delay was due to the school holding the loan funds until VA paid the tuition. The memorandum indicates that, after VA received the bill several months after the course began, the Veteran received his loan shortly thereafter. This finding indicates that his tuition was paid. Again, case notes from that time period and the December 2010 memorandum note that the Veteran used these loans for living expenses, not tuition. The Board finds the case notes to be probative and persuasive as they were taken contemporaneously and for the purpose of document action(s) taken with regard to the Veteran's vocational rehabilitation. Moreover, the representative from the current school concluded that L.A. Recording Workshop was paid because the Veteran would not have received his certificate of completion without payment. The Board finds this reasoning to be logically and consistent with other evidence of record. Additionally, VR&E finance documents show proof that VA has made payments on the Veteran's VR&E program. Indeed, records show that VA made numerous subsistence payments from 1998 through 1999, and has paid over $620,285.67 as of August 2021 on the Veteran's VR&E program. See VRE Finance (General). The Board also finds this evidence to be persuasive and worthy of weight as it was recorded by the VR&E to show monies paid out by that administration. Conversely, despite three prior remands to attempt to obtain evidence of a contract for repayment of loans, the Veteran has not submitted probative evidence that contradicts the prior case notes and/or memorandum, nor has he submitted any evidence memorializing a contract for repayment of the loans. See Wood v. Derwinski, 1 Vet. App. 190, 193 (1991) ("The duty to assist is not always a one-way street. If a veteran wishes help, he cannot passively wait for it in those circumstances where he may or should have information that is essential in obtaining the putative evidence."). The Board acknowledges the Veteran's argument to the effect that a school financial aid officer suggested taking out a loan to expedite starting the program because VA takes a while to pay. See February 2020 Hearing Transcript at 3. The Veteran asserted that he was told he could receive reimbursement once VA pays the tuition. Id. While the Veteran may have been told that by a school representative, the record does not tend to show that the Veteran received approval from VA, or even spoke to VA, about pursuing tuition payment and reimbursement this way. The Board is sympathetic to the Veteran's contentions; however, VA is not liable for his reliance on said erroneous information dispensed or omitted by his school's representative. See Harvey v. Brown, 6 Vet. App. 416, 424 (1994) (holding that an appellant was not entitled to education benefits based on his assertion that misleading or erroneous information was provided regarding education benefits). The United States Court of Appeals for Veterans Claims (Court) has held that inaccurate advice does not create any legal right to benefits where such benefits are otherwise precluded. See Shields v. Brown, 8 Vet. App. 346, 351 (1995). The Board also recognizes the Veteran's contentions that the school fraudulently kept the student loan money, as well as the VA tuition payments. See VA Memorandum, dated December 2010 and March 2011. The proper course for the Veteran, if he believes there was fraud in the handling of his student loans, is to pursue such a claim with the U.S. Department of Education. When looking at the relevant and probative evidence, the record tends to support a finding that the funds he received from the Direct Loan program were not applied to pay for his tuition, fees, books and supplies for his Chapter 31 program of training; rather, the loans were for personal living expenses. As such, the relevant laws and regulations do not obligate VA to repay students loans received by a Veteran that are unrelated to the purposes of the Chapter 31 program, which is to assist entitled Veterans with service-connected disabilities and an employment handicap to prepare for, obtain, and maintain a job, to include benefits such as tutorial assistance and payment of training allowance. See U.S. Department of Veterans Affairs, Veterans Benefits Administration, Veteran Readiness and Employment: Chapter 31, https://www.benefits.va.gov/BENEFITS/factsheets/serviceconnected/Ch31FactSheet.pdf (last updated in June 2020, last visited Dec. 21, 2021). For the foregoing reasons, the preponderance of the evidence is against a finding that VA is obligated to reimbursement for/repayment of loans received by the Veteran while attending a program of training under Chapter 31. 38 U.S.C. § 5107(b). Accordingly, the appeal is denied. Paul Sorisio Veterans Law Judge Board of Veterans' Appeals Attorney for the Board R. Kettler, Counsel The Board's decision in this case is binding only with respect to the instant matter decided. This decision is not precedential and does not establish VA policies or interpretations of general applicability. 38 C.F.R. § 20.1303.