I would say the Reasonable Doubt rule is also a joke. As far as the VA sees it, we are lying about a service connected condition until we jump through several hoops and spend hundreds and sometimes thousands of dollars to prove that the conditions we have are service connected. This is true even when a condition is covered under presumptive conditions for a particular war. How can this be????
Here is an excerpt from the VA's own rule, but my wife and I were called
"Mere suspicion or doubt as to the truth of any statements submitted, as distinguished from impeachment or contradiction by evidence or known facts, is not justifiable basis for denying the application of the reasonable doubt doctrine if the entire, complete record otherwise warrants invoking this doctrine."
This is what the BVA judge said about mine and my wife's testimony:
As such, this evidence calls into question the reliability of the Veteran, and KM, as historians of his current lumbar spine disorder. In light of the above, the Board finds that the contentions that the Veteran experienced low back pain since the 1992 motor vehicle accident is not credible.