Second Class Petty Officers
  • Content count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

2 Neutral


  • Rank
    E-4 Petty Officer 3rd Class
  • Birthday

Previous Fields

  • Branch of Service

Recent Profile Visitors

470 profile views
  1. Berta, I agree with you but what I am trying to explain here is that the mountain of evidence I have provided, including the opinion of the CP examiner if that it is NOT a secondary condition, it is the PRIMARY condition. I have had multiple diagnostic testing to see if it is being caused by something else and every test I've had is normal. Every doctor that ever been involved has documented that it is NOT related to anything else. The VA has all of this evidence already. Why would they be asking for something that already have in duplicate?
  2. Many of you have seen my prior posts regarding my "bladder condition" claim. Here is the latest news. Please tell me your thoughts. The brief history is that in November of 2016 my VSO filed a CUE / re-open on a bladder claim that was denied back in 02. The original claim showed a condition that was diagnosed in service as "overactive bladder" what's important to understand here is that the overactive bladder WAS NOT LINKED TO ANY OTHER CONDITION. It was a stand alone diagnosis. I was treated in service and placed on meds. The original denial stated that the " preponderance evidence was not in my favor" Please also know that there was absolutely no conflicting evidence or opinion to that diagnoses, and to the best of my memory, I was never given a CP exam for that claimed condition back in 02. I never filed a NOD on that denial because at that time, I didn't know any better. Fast forward to November of 2016, my VSO filed the CUE / re-open with new and material evidence. I was scheduled for a CP exam for the overactive bladder and it was scored VERY much in my favor. The examiner confirmed the diagnoses of "overactive bladder" She also linked it to an in-service condition based on the military medical records I provided. I also submitted another nexus letter form a different doctor stating the same thing. Every single doctor, including my urologists have documented the diagnoses as "overactive bladder" I received a notice the other day that the claim had been deferred for a medical opinion. I inquired through the IRIS system and the response I received was that the rater wanted clarification from the examiner as to whether the overactive bladder was a primary condition or a symptom of something else. Right about then is where I totally lost it. Like I said, EVERY SINGLE DOCUMENT I PROVIDED THE VA STATED IT WAS A PRIMARY DIAGNOSES AS WELL AS THE C&P EXAMINER'S REPORT STATING THE EXACT SAME THING. What are they trying to do to me?? Why are they not using the evidence that is right in front of them including their own damn examiners diagnoses? Any thoughts, advice etc. would be greatly appreciated.
  3. this is really getting old. So my bladder condition I found out was deferred for a "medical opinion" based on the inquiry system that I sent my deferred question to today. I really need help understanding this! My CP exam was totally in my favor and the examiner gave her opinion as being "more likely than not" I also provided 2 different nexus statements from doctors saying the same thing. I also provided my military medical records showing treatment in service for the condition as well as current records... what in the hell could they possibly be looking for another medical opinion for?
  4. Thanks Berta. I looked further into the deferred item and on ebenefits there is a tab that says "needed from others" I clicked on it and all it says <VA medical center> That's it, nothing else.... The laughable part is that below that, it says that I can provide the requested documents to speed the process up..... There is NOTHING that shows what they are even asking for? How can I provide something when they aren't saying what it is??? All that's there is <VA medical center> I've already had a C&P exam which like I said was very much in my favor and 2 nexus letters from different Doctors stating it was present in my active duty and military medical records to prove it. Im totally lost as to what they could be asking for in addition to what I've already submitted??
  5. Thanks Bronco.
  6. So I find out today that my claim has a deferred item. I filed for a bladder condition and shoulder condition. My shoulder was granted 20% and my bladder issue was deferred. I really don't understand that. I submitted a ton of evidence as well as 2 nexus letters from 2 different doctors. My bladder CP exam was very much in my favor. The examiner also opined that the bladder was service connected. The only hiccup is that the bladder claim was filed as a reopen / CUE from a denial back in 02. Could a large retro be holding it up? Any thoughts?
  7. Thank you
  8. My claim has been sitting in the preparation for decision for 30 days now. My patience is wearing thin. I provided very clear evidence and my CP exams were pretty strongly in my favor. What the heck are they waiting on? I only claimed 2 conditions. One of them has the potential to have a lot of retro... a lot. Could that be the hold up? If the retro was awarded woul this be the stage it gets stalled in?
  9. Bronco, based on what you read on my denial for the bladder condition and what I've said about it in my posts, do you see a possible CUE?
  10. Thanks hamslice.
  11. Bronco... the issue is the bladder condition not the foot condition. Thanks. This is the best I could do with providing you with the original denial from 02. I cannot scan or do I just took a pic of the letter. Please let me know if you can't read it and I'll try something else. Thanks.
  12. This is the best I could do with providing you with the original denial from 02. I cannot scan or do I just took a pic of the letter. Please let me know if you can't read it and I'll try something else. Thanks.
  13. pwrslm, Thank you! I will try and scan the denial letter for your review. I do remember that the rater did in fact mention in the write up as well as the "evidenced used" the urology records from the Urologist stating dates etc.. They also noted the diagnostic tests I underwent. They also mentioned that my primary care tested me for all conditions that could explain a over active bladder and could not find a primary cause. Since no other cause could be found, I was given a dx of a primary over active bladder which was a ratable condition back then and still is. The only clear reason for denial according to the letter was that my discharge physical said it wasn't debilitating and therefore service connection was denied.
  14. Thanks. The only issue pwrslm is that I submitted that claim the day I officially discharged. The Urologist never gave an "opinion" I just submitted his records. It was the discharging doctor (general practice) that said it wasn't debilitating. Does that make a difference?
  15. Any chance you are looking at the right shoulder and not the left? The left shoulder is the one being claimed. My ROM was nill. I literally moved in 5 inches in any given direction and the examiner even commented on the lack of ROM.