The Board finds that recovery of the $9,663.87 overpayment does not violate the principles of equity and good conscience due to VA's error in creating the overpayment and the Veteran's acceptance of erroneous payments.
The deciding factor: VA made an error by paying a dependency allowance for the Veteran's son while he was receiving Chapter 35 DEA benefits, but the Veteran accepted these payments and continued to receive them despite being informed that she could not do so. The Board finds this fault primarily lies with VA, although the Veteran also bears some responsibility.
- Claimed conditions
- Not specified in this decision
- How they argued it
- Not specified
- Exposure basis
- None
- Rating assigned
- None in this decision
- Decision date
- July 18, 2017
- Citation
- 1727934
This is a plain-language summary generated by AI from a public Board of Veterans’ Appeals decision. It can contain errors — always verify against the original. Look up the original decision on VA.gov (opens in a new tab) using citation 1727934.
What this means for you
A grant means the Board agreed the veteran was entitled to the benefit. Decisions like this show the kind of evidence and arguments that tend to succeed for claims like it.
What you can do next
Free starter guide for your own claim
Reading this because you were denied or under-rated? Get the plain-English next steps — your appeal options, the deadline that protects you, and how appeals like yours turn out. One email, no spam.
We will only use this to send the guide. No spam, unsubscribe any time. We never sell your information.
We are not the VA. Veterans’ Rights is an independent resource built for veterans. We are not the U.S. Department of Veterans Affairs, not part of the government, and not endorsed by any government agency.
This is general information, not legal advice. For advice about your own situation, talk to a VA-accredited representative — many help for free.