Chisholm Chisholm & Kilpatrick, usually called CCK Law, is a law firm that represents veterans in selected VA disability appeals. Its public materials describe work before VA regional offices, the Board of Veterans' Appeals, the U.S. Court of Appeals for Veterans Claims, and the Federal Circuit.
That is a different service from a claims-coaching company or a medical-evidence vendor. CCK can act as legal counsel when an accredited individual is appointed. The central buyer questions are therefore not simply, “Is CCK legitimate?” They are: Will the firm accept this case, what issues will it handle, what exact percentage and expenses apply, and who will communicate with the veteran?
I built Claim Raven, which offers self-service software to some of the same audience. Treat that as a commercial conflict and verify the linked sources yourself.
TL;DR
- CCK is an established law firm with a national veterans-law practice. Its practice page describes representation at VA, the Board, the CAVC, and the Federal Circuit.
- CCK offers a free case evaluation, but that does not mean it accepts every case or that representation is free.
- CCK says its veterans-law work uses contingency fees based on recovered retroactive benefits and that it is not paid unless the claimant receives qualifying back pay.
- I did not find a single universal CCK fee percentage on the public pages reviewed. VA's general 20-percent reasonableness presumption is not proof of the percentage in a particular CCK agreement.
- Current 38 CFR § 14.636 requires attorney and agent fee agreements to be written and signed. Case expenses may be addressed separately.
- Public feedback is mixed across platforms. CCK's own testimonials and favorable BBB reviews describe successful outcomes and communication, while Yelp and forum discussions include complaints about communication, pace, intake, or case selection.
- Outcomes in public reviews are individual experiences, not a firm-wide success rate.
What CCK does
CCK's veterans-law page describes representation involving:
- VA regional-office proceedings;
- Higher-Level Review, Supplemental Claims, and Board appeals;
- effective-date and rating disputes;
- individual unemployability and other compensation issues;
- appeals to the Court of Appeals for Veterans Claims; and
- selected Federal Circuit litigation.
The exact scope depends on the engagement. A firm may accept one issue in a multi-issue decision and decline another. Before signing, identify every condition, rating, effective date, dependency issue, or court question the agreement includes.
CCK's public materials are oriented toward veterans who already received an unfavorable or incomplete VA decision. That fits the general federal fee framework: under § 14.636, an accredited attorney or agent may charge for qualifying representation after VA has issued notice of an initial agency decision and the other regulatory requirements are satisfied.
How CCK's fee works
CCK's fee explainer says accredited representatives such as CCK commonly work on contingency and do not get paid unless the claimant is awarded and paid retroactive benefits.
The page also explains the VA-wide rules:
- fees at or below 20 percent of past-due benefits are presumed reasonable when the regulatory conditions are met;
- fees above 33 1/3 percent are presumed unreasonable;
- future monthly benefits are not the proper contingency base; and
- a direct-pay agreement must satisfy additional rules, including a fee not exceeding 20 percent, excluding expenses.
Those are regulatory benchmarks, not CCK's universal price. The public pages reviewed did not establish one percentage that applies to every CCK client or every level of representation.
The signed agreement should state:
- the exact percentage or other fee calculation;
- which past-due benefits count toward the fee;
- whether VA will pay the fee directly;
- what case expenses are separate from the attorney fee;
- what happens if the client changes lawyers or ends the representation; and
- whether a court appeal uses a separate agreement or may involve an Equal Access to Justice Act fee.
Do not rely on a telephone summary. Read the actual fee and expense provisions.
Start with a free claim assessment. Answer a few quick questions and review one claim document to see what the record supports, what may be missing, and what to check next. Start my Free Claim Readiness Review. A free account and separate AI consent are required before uploading. No credit card is required; optional deeper tools have their own limits. This educational review does not predict a rating or replace an accredited representative.
Claim Raven works alongside your accredited representative. It never replaces one. We never take a percentage of your back pay. Plans are a flat monthly price you can cancel any time from your billing page. We never contact VA about your claim and never file anything on your behalf.
What “no fee unless we win” does not answer
Contingency language answers when the attorney fee becomes due. It may not answer every cost question.
Private medical opinions, vocational reports, filing expenses, copying, record acquisition, or other case development may be treated as expenses. The agreement should say who approves them, who advances them, and whether they remain payable if the case is unsuccessful or the relationship ends.
It should also define a “win.” A remand may be valuable because it returns a case for correction, but a remand is not always an immediate award of past-due benefits. Court fees and agency-level contingency fees can follow different rules.
Accreditation and who represents you
VA accredits individuals, not a law-firm brand. CCK says its veterans-law team includes VA-accredited attorneys and claims advocates. Before appointment, search the assigned representative in VA's Office of General Counsel database.
Also ask:
- Who is the attorney or accredited agent responsible for my case?
- Which work will be performed by attorneys, accredited agents, paralegals, or support staff?
- Who can make strategic recommendations?
- Who will appear at a hearing, if one is requested?
- How are urgent deadlines handled if the primary contact is unavailable?
A large team can offer depth and coverage. It can also mean the veteran communicates with several people. Neither result is automatic, so the communication model should be clear at intake.
What the public reviews show
CCK publishes a large testimonial collection with accounts of favorable decisions, back pay, and helpful communication. The page expressly says past results do not guarantee future outcomes. Because CCK selects and hosts those testimonials, they are useful examples but not independent measurement.
The current web scan also found:
- recent favorable BBB customer reviews;
- Reddit and veteran-forum accounts describing successful remands, awards, or periodic updates;
- other forum accounts describing slow communication, long waits, declined cases, or dissatisfaction; and
- a substantially lower Yelp profile than the company's own testimonial presentation.
That divergence is a reason to read the newest detailed reviews rather than rely on one aggregate star score. Focus on recurring operational facts: whether the reviewer identifies the appeal level, how long the relationship lasted, who communicated, and whether the complaint concerns the firm or the VA's timeline.
An individual veteran's favorable rating does not prove the firm caused every part of the result. A long wait also does not prove the firm delayed the appeal. VA and court queues can be lengthy. Reviews are most useful for evaluating communication and process expectations.
Who may be a good fit
CCK may be worth interviewing when:
- VA has already issued a decision;
- the dispute involves a legal or evidentiary issue the firm handles;
- the potential retroactive award makes contingency representation sensible;
- the veteran wants counsel capable of continuing to the Board or court if appropriate; and
- the case fits the firm's selection criteria.
CCK may be a poor fit when:
- the veteran only needs free help filing a straightforward initial claim;
- the firm declines the case or only accepts a narrower issue than the veteran wants pursued;
- the veteran wants a guaranteed outcome or fixed completion date; or
- the veteran is uncomfortable with the agreement's fee, expense, or communication terms.
Alternatives to CCK
Accredited VSO
An accredited VSO can help with claims and appeals without charging the veteran. This can be the best first stop for a straightforward filing, evidence organization, or decision review.
Another accredited attorney or claims agent
Fee percentages, case-selection standards, court experience, staffing, and communication practices vary. Compare at least two written agreements when time permits.
Self-representation and software
A veteran may represent themselves. Claim Raven can help organize documents, research public information, and understand workflow. It does not provide legal representation, file the appeal, or replace an accredited professional.
How scope can change across the appeal path
CCK's public practice covers work before VA and, in accepted matters, appellate courts. That breadth does not mean one engagement automatically includes every stage.
An appeal can move from a Supplemental Claim or Higher-Level Review to the Board of Veterans' Appeals, then potentially to the Court of Appeals for Veterans Claims and higher courts. Each forum has different deadlines, records, procedures, and admission requirements. Ask the agreement to identify the issues and stages included now, what requires a new case-acceptance decision, and whether a remand remains covered.
Also ask who makes lane decisions and how the veteran participates. A Higher-Level Review generally relies on the existing record, while a Supplemental Claim requires new and relevant evidence, and Board options have different evidence and hearing rules. The best lane depends on the error, not on a firm's general preference.
Fee mechanics beyond “no fee unless we win”
CCK says its fee is contingent on qualifying retroactive benefits, but the public site does not state one universal percentage. The signed agreement should state the rate, define past-due benefits, identify direct-payment treatment, and explain expenses.
VA's general rule in 38 CFR § 14.636 says a direct-pay fee not exceeding 20% of past-due benefits is generally presumed reasonable. It does not prove what CCK charges in a particular matter, and expenses are excluded from that percentage calculation.
Ask for examples involving staged ratings, TDIU, SMC, dependent changes, a Board remand, and an award on an issue not accepted by the firm. Ask whether court representation can produce a separate Equal Access to Justice Act fee and, if so, how any EAJA award interacts with the veteran's contingency fee. The answer should come from the contract and attorney, not from assumptions based on another firm's arrangement.
Evidence development and outside costs
A law firm may identify a missing medical opinion, vocational assessment, record, or expert analysis. That can materially improve an appeal, but the attorney fee and the expense are different questions.
Before an outside expert is hired, ask who selected the expert, what the estimate covers, whether the veteran must approve the expense, whether the firm advances it, and who owes it if the opinion is unfavorable or the appeal loses. The expert should remain free to reach an independent conclusion.
The veteran should receive and fact-check draft factual summaries. Legal strategy belongs to counsel and medical conclusions belong to clinicians, but service dates, symptoms, employment history, and treatment facts can still be corrected before filing.
Case acceptance, staffing, and communication
Large specialty practices do not accept every inquiry. A decline does not prove the claim lacks merit; it may reflect timing, issue type, evidence, workload, or expected economics. Ask whether the firm can identify the general reason and whether a deadline remains while the veteran seeks other help.
For an accepted matter, verify the assigned accredited individual through VA's search. Ask who handles routine questions, who makes legal decisions, how often the team updates clients during VA inactivity, and whether the veteran receives every filing and decision.
CCK publishes extensive educational material, but reading the firm's article is not the same as receiving advice in an attorney-client relationship. Do not assume a consultation, newsletter, or website submission stops an appeal deadline.
Privacy, file access, and termination
The firm will likely receive the full claims file and substantial medical information. Confirm the client portal, authorized team access, use of outside experts and vendors, retention after closure, and the process for exporting the complete file.
The termination clause should explain what happens if the veteran changes counsel or CCK withdraws, including any later fee petition, division of fees with successor counsel, outstanding expenses, and file-transfer timing. Those clauses are routine due diligence, not a prediction of conflict.
How Claim Raven compares
| CCK Law | Claim Raven | |
|---|---|---|
| Primary role | Legal representation in accepted matters | Self-service educational software |
| VA-accredited representative | CCK says assigned veterans-law professionals are accredited; verify the individual | No |
| Files or argues appeal | Yes, within the accepted engagement | No |
| Fee | Contingency based on qualifying retroactive benefits; exact agreement controls | Free to start; paid plans from $14.99 to $39.99 monthly |
| Medical opinion | May help develop or obtain evidence; confirm expense terms | Does not provide signed medical opinions |
Nine questions before signing with CCK
- Which exact issues and appeal lanes will CCK handle?
- Who is my assigned accredited representative?
- What is the exact fee percentage and back-pay calculation?
- Is the agreement direct-pay through VA?
- Which expenses require my approval, and can I owe them without an award?
- What happens to fees if I discharge the firm or it withdraws?
- How often will I receive updates, and from whom?
- Does the agreement include Board and court work, or would those require new decisions and contracts?
- What work will I need to complete myself?
Bottom line
CCK is a real veterans-law practice with broad agency and appellate capability. Its public materials support the basic legitimacy and scope of the firm, but they do not replace the individual engagement agreement.
The most important unanswered public fact is the exact price for a particular case. CCK describes contingency representation based on recovered retroactive benefits, while VA regulations provide general reasonableness and direct-payment rules. Ask for the actual percentage, expenses, issue scope, and termination terms in writing before signing.
Public feedback: positive experiences, concerns, and limits
Feedback checked September 10, 2026. This update covers outside feedback; it does not redate every price or legal source elsewhere in the article.
What reviewers liked
Selected CCK BBB customer reviews praise communication and persistence. A Reddit client account describes help obtaining a court remand. A remand returns an issue for further action; it should not be relabeled as a final benefits award.
What reviewers disliked or what remains unverified
That Reddit writer also describes the firm being unable to continue at a later stage and a subsequent unfavorable result. This makes scope and continuity important questions even within a report of useful legal work. I did not infer that the firm caused the later decision or that every engagement covers every stage.
What I would check before paying
Ask which issues and stages the engagement includes, who handles the case after a remand, and what happens if the firm withdraws or cannot continue. Separate an intake decision, a completed court service, and ongoing agency representation when comparing feedback.
How I checked: Exact-brand Reddit and open-web review searches; selected linked material, not an exhaustive platform export. Purchases and claim outcomes were not independently verified. These accounts cannot establish a success rate or predict your result.
Sources and limitations
- CCK veterans-law practice, checked August 13, 2026.
- CCK fee explainer, checked August 13, 2026.
- CCK veterans-law testimonials, checked August 13, 2026.
- 38 CFR § 14.636, attorney and agent fees.
- VA accreditation search.
- Review-platform accounts are anecdotal and may be incomplete or unverifiable. No confidential CCK engagement agreement was reviewed.
Where to go next
Claim Raven is self-service educational software, not legal, medical, or VA-accredited advice.
-Landon Founder, Claim Raven | U.S. Army Veteran
Berry Law Review: VA Appeal Fees, Services, and Contract Questions
Hill & Ponton Review: Fees, Services, and Fit
Woods & Woods Review: Fees, Expenses, and VA Appeal Scope