Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Veterans Benefits topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Committee advances veterans consumer‑protection bill for possible amendment after split testimony
Summary
The Senate State Affairs Committee moved S 1080, a bill to limit compensated veterans‑claims assistance to accredited entities, to the 14th Order of Business for possible amendment after supporters and opponents presented competing proposals on predatory fees and alternative consumer protections.
The Senate State Affairs Committee on Monday moved S 1080, a bill intended to curb predatory paid claims consultants who assist veterans with Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) benefit claims, to the 14th Order of Business for possible amendment.
The bill, introduced by Senator Anthon, would prohibit private claim consultants from profiting from veterans’ initial VA benefit claims and clarify that compensated assistance should be limited to accredited entities such as a Veterans Service Officer (VSO), attorneys, or claim agents as defined in 38 C.F.R. § 14.629, according to Kelsie Zak, a legal intern in the Office of the Senate President Pro Tempore.
Why it matters: Committee members said the bill aims to protect veterans from firms that charge large contingency fees for initial claims when free assistance is available. Supporters cited frequent advertising by disreputable businesses and argued veterans often lack needed protections; opponents said a broad prohibition could eliminate access to some helpful services and urged targeted consumer‑protection measures instead.
During testimony, the committee heard competing accounts. Bill Taylor, co‑founder of Veterans Guardian VA Claim Consulting, opposed S 1080 and said most claims consultants operate ethically; he described his firm’s contingency fee as a voluntary, one‑time contract equal to five times the monthly increase awarded and said Veterans Guardian does not access veterans’ financial accounts. By contrast, Daniel Murphy, adjutant of the Idaho Disabled American Veterans, and Karl Kurtz, commander of Boise DAV Chapter 2, supported the bill and described frequent advertisements by questionable businesses; Murphy told the committee the average VA compensation claim takes roughly three to nine months to adjudicate and appeals can take eight months to two years.
Other witnesses proposed alternative approaches. Lisa Kalkes of Veterans Benefit Guide and Ashleigh Barry of the National Association for Veterans Rights opposed an outright prohibition on unaccredited consultants and urged stricter disclosure rules and fee caps; Kalkes confirmed the common fee structure she observed is five times the monthly increase awarded, while Barry said she had no data showing that paid assistance speeds claim outcomes.
Senator Ruchti moved to send S 1080 to the 14th Order of Business for possible amendment; Senator Adams seconded. Committee members discussed seeking additional information on fee structures and consumer‑protection options before deciding whether to restrict unaccredited services. Chairman Guthrie indicated interest in the bill reaching the floor. The motion carried by voice vote.
Next steps: S 1080 will appear on the 14th Order of Business for possible amendment and further consideration by the Senate.
