Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Veterans Benefits topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Panel approves bill to restrict paid veterans-claim consultants and add disclosure requirements
Summary
House Bill 342, as amended, passed the subcommittee and would create consumer-protection guardrails for private advisers who charge veterans for help filing service-connected disability claims; testimony included a former VA official and debate focused on protecting veterans while preserving legal options.
The Banking & Consumer Affairs Subcommittee voted to advance House Bill 342, as amended, to the Commerce Committee after detailed discussion about unpaid backlogs at the Department of Veterans Affairs and protections for veterans who use paid consultants to file service-connected disability claims.
Sponsor Chairman Moon said the amended bill targets organizations that operate today with little oversight and would make specified acts deceptive under Tennessee’s Consumer Protection Act. He described several disclosure and contract requirements, noting the state attorney general has committed to pursue violations. “Most of these have to do with making sure there are clear written agreements between that veteran and the person that's advising or consulting with them,” Moon said.
Committee members raised concerns about existing capacity and the effects of the PACT Act and VA backlog on veterans seeking help. Representative Hale described local veterans’ concerns that hiring paid consultants may be seen as an expensive shortcut but said the bill’s intent is to “establish guardrails for people as they seek these benefits.”
Peter O'Rourke, identified on the record as a former president of the Department of Veterans Affairs under President Trump, testified on the legislative history of claims assistance and said federal accreditation procedures were established to ensure representatives with power of attorney are accredited by the VA. O'Rourke described changes in federal claims-processing approaches since the 2000s and noted states are now considering guardrails of their own.
The committee approved the bill as amended. The clerk reported: “Mr. Chairman, you have 6 ayes, 0 nos and 1 present not voting.” House Bill 342 will proceed to the Commerce Committee. The transcript records no rulemaking schedule or effective date on the record.
