Brian T. Roberts served on active duty in the United States Coast Guard from February 1998 to February 2002. In January 2012, he filed a claim for disability compensation with the Department of Veterans Affairs based on post-traumatic stress disorder. Later that year, he also submitted an application for total disability based on individual unemployability, stating that he had stopped working and had no income during the prior year.
Over the following years, Roberts underwent multiple VA examinations. Early examinations described occupational and social impairment with reduced reliability and productivity. In 2014, a VA examiner found total occupational and social impairment, which led the VA to assign a 100 percent PTSD rating and award TDIU. The VA also later determined that Roberts’ disability was permanent and total, establishing eligibility for dependents’ educational assistance.
In 2016 and 2017, the VA conducted additional reviews of Roberts’ file. During that period, the VA Office of Inspector General initiated an investigation after information surfaced regarding Roberts’ business activities and sworn statements made in other proceedings. The investigation examined discrepancies between statements Roberts made to the VA and information from bankruptcy filings, aviation medical records, and business activities.
The OIG investigation concluded that Roberts had misrepresented his employment status, income, and functional limitations during the period in which he received disability benefits. The investigation documented evidence that Roberts continued to engage in business operations, maintained professional licenses, and participated in activities inconsistent with the level of impairment previously reported to the VA.
As part of the record, the VA considered the status of Roberts’ business as a service-disabled veteran-owned small business. The business had previously been certified under the VA’s SDVOSB program. In May 2018, the VA revoked that certification after determining it could not verify that Roberts exercised sufficient day-to-day control over the company’s operations. The revocation was based on findings that management and operational control rested substantially with others rather than with Roberts.
The certification revocation became part of the broader evidentiary record addressing Roberts’ work activity and capacity during the period at issue.
Following the OIG investigation, the VA proposed to reduce Roberts’ PTSD rating from 100 percent to 10 percent, terminate TDIU for a defined period, and terminate eligibility for dependents’ educational assistance and nonservice-connected pension benefits. The VA implemented those actions in 2017.
Separately, federal criminal charges were brought against Roberts and family members alleging conspiracy to defraud the VA. Roberts later entered a guilty plea to one count related to misrepresentation of disability status and employment. He was sentenced to a term of imprisonment and ordered to pay restitution to the VA.
Roberts appealed the benefit reductions to the Board of Veterans’ Appeals. He submitted private medical opinions asserting severe psychiatric impairment and inability to engage in gainful employment. He also maintained that any work activity occurred in a sheltered or protected environment and did not reflect competitive employment.
The Board reviewed the medical evidence, the OIG investigation, sworn testimony, and documentary records. It determined that the medical opinions relied heavily on inaccurate representations made by Roberts and his family members. The Board found the OIG investigation and related records to be highly probative and concluded that the prior disability ratings were based on fraudulent statements.
The Board upheld the reduction of the PTSD rating, termination of TDIU for the relevant period, and termination of dependents’ educational assistance.
Roberts appealed to the United States Court of Appeals for Veterans Claims. The court reviewed whether the Board provided adequate reasons for its conclusions and whether it committed legal or factual error.
The court determined that the Board properly evaluated credibility and weighed the evidence. It held that the Board permissibly relied on the OIG investigation and criminal proceedings when assessing the reliability of the medical opinions and Roberts’ statements. The court also concluded that any alleged error regarding the definition of sheltered employment did not result in prejudice.
The court affirmed the Board’s decision upholding the benefit reductions and terminations.
If you’re facing issues involving SDVOSB or CVE certification, Whitcomb Selinsky PC assists businesses with matters related to service-disabled veteran-owned small business certification and eligibility. Reach out to our team to schedule a consultation and learn how our team can assist with your situation.