Question On Effective Date

14 posts in this topic

I posted the other day that I was still waiting for my favorable portion of the BVA decision. This decision was "stuck" at the AMC with other remanded issues. I just spoke with someone at the 800 number and was informed that a new entry was posted with today's date (23rd), and that it was now at authroization.

I wanted to ask a question concerning the effective date (obviously jumping the gun, but curious none-the-less).

All little background. I originally filed for service connection in 2003. I was notified in 2006 that I had been granted service connection (at the % that made me eligible to file for TDIU), and this was made retro back to 2003. Then, after receiving this favorable decision I filed for TDIU (3 weeks later). I became unemployable in 2000 (by SSDI) solely due to this condition (medical documentation from doc was a part of my file when I filed in 2003 stating that I was no longer employable), but VA only granted 70%. Anyway, I wanted to ask what my effective date would be?

Would it go back to 2003? (since I was not notified of the favorable decision making me eligible to apply for TDIU until 3 years later: remember it was retroed back to 2003). Or, could it possibly go back to the date placed on SSDI solely due to the same condition due to the documentation from doc that was part of the file at the time of the original filing?

I am concerned that they will only go by the date on the IU claim form of 2006, but I could not have filed until I received the decision giving me the necessary % (original claim was for service connection).

Sorry for the long post, but any input would be appreciated


Share this post

Link to post
Share on other sites

You filed for and was granted SSDI in 2000 but you did not file for VA SC until 2003. Why?

If a claim has not been filed then the VA has no obligation to pay comp because they have no idea that you want to claim.

Now if when you filed for SC in 03 you were already SC for something else and mentioned IU (even though you did not have the %) you might have a shot at getting a start date of 03 but because you waited until 06 when you were finally awarded 70% and met the %. The VA I would think will only grant your claim back to the date it was filed which would be 06.

That being said this is only my opinion but I think you are hoping beyond hope on getting the 2000 date when there was not even a claim filed. You might get 03 but that to is going to be a reach if you did not mention that you were unemployed at the time. If you did THEN you could get 03 but that is going to be your best I think.

Good luck though and let us know how it pans out!?

Share this post

Link to post
Share on other sites

Wow, I think if you filed a claim in 2003 and informed VA that you were unemployed and or awarded SSDI, then your retro should go back to 2000. Your post stated that you filed in 2003 and VA finally awarded your claims in 2006. Did VA request your SSA records and if they are in your VA C-File then VA should pay the earliest date that you became unemployable which is 2000.


Edited by pete992

Share this post

Link to post
Share on other sites

Thanks for the replies

The VA does have the SSA records, so I guess we will see what effective date they come up with. The TDIU was granted by the BVA and the BVA decision even references the SSDI, and doctor statements (unemployable) from 2000 that was granted solely for the SC condition.

Would the records from the doctors (that were a part of my file when I first applied for sc) that stated I was unemployable in 2000 (which put me on SSDI) equate to an inferred claim for IU when they granted the 70% in 2003?

Will post the results.


Share this post

Link to post
Share on other sites

3.400 Effective dates: Date entitlement arose or the date claim was filed whichever was later. In your case if a VA doc stated you were uneployable and they have this evidence then you should NOD the decision and ask for an earlier effective date. ALso remember there are several paragraphs that superceed 3.400.

Edited by jbasser

Share this post

Link to post
Share on other sites

"Would the records from the doctors (that were a part of my file when I first applied for sc) that stated I was unemployable in 2000 (which put me on SSDI) equate to an inferred claim for IU when they granted the 70% in 2003?"

I would think so.If the VA was also aware of the SSA award.

VA hinges on the filing date of the 21-8940 form in most cases for EED and retro but there is topic I posted here about the "date entitlement arose" which could help you.

It is hard to know what the VA will do in your cases as to the proper EED.

This discussion might help you-

I always give my husband as personal example of how 'when entitlement arose' works.

Filed claim for higher rating of his 30% SC PTSD in late 1992. Filed Sec 1151 claim in 1994.

Sent TDIU form in late 1992 or early 1993,

Sent SSA award in 1993 solely for PTSD.

He died 1994, claims re opened by me. denied denied denied- fought them with evidence

Awarded 100% SC P & T PTSD posthumously 1997 with an EED back to 1991.Sec 1151 claim awarded in 1998.EED 1994.

Nov 1991 was his EED for VA 100% SC-the VA used the same date that SSA did to determine when SC caused unemployability.

They never acknowledged the TDIU form at all. They can't really award a deceased vet TDIU so I guess this is why they awarded him 100 % P & T .

I feel that even when the date entitlement arose is prior to their receipt of the TDIU form (another reason we should send it and not wait for them to send it to us-as they save money when the use the 70% criteria to send it out)-

and this favorable entitlement date could be evident by a SSA award for the same disability-

the VA hardly ever recognizes the entitlement date could be more favorable that the TDIU form receipt date- and even if they do- they dont award it and hope we do not challenge this date.

In my husband's case the evidence was so clear that they could not have gotten away with the TDIU receipt form date.They never even acknowledged he sent it in.The VA also wrote to 2 Senators and my Congressman that SSA had refused to send them his SSA records,after I questioned a SOC denial I got. It was a lie.When I found out about this VA lie I made a major fuss,and soon thereafter they awarded him posthumously.

The SSA were crucial to his claim and so VA had every reason to make up a big one. The reality is his authorization forms for his SSA records remained in his file for almost 6 years - 3 years after he died but the VA never attempted to get those records.Until I raised hell when they lied to congressional inquirys. I had re-opened his 1151 claim and also filed a FTCA tort claim and was sending them and the OGC continuous evidence of their malpractice at same time I was supporting the 100% SC claim so they were not happy with me at all.They admitting to causing his death shortly after the 100% posthumous award came.

It pays to double check on SSA records and whether the VA follows through with attempting to obtain them.

An SSA award is in essence an independent medical opinion and if solely for the same SC condition,the VA MUST award TDIU or 100% SC (Washington V Derwinski) tp://

Edited by Tbird
added link to Washington v Derwinski

Share this post

Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now





  • Topics

  • Member Statistics

    • Total Members
    • Most Online

    Newest Member
    wife of a veteran
  • Forum Statistics

    • Total Topics
    • Total Posts
  • Posts

    • Please let me know your thoughts on possible rating: OPINIONS: The veteran still suffers from right ventricular dysfunction as the result of tricuspid regurgitation discovered by transesopageal   echocardiogram performed 5 Sept 1995 in-service. To ascribe now a present right or left ventricular ejection fraction would require cardiologic studies not orderable by C&P examiners. RATIONALE: Service treatment records as well physical examination board proceedings via VBMS, CPRS, physical examination, radiologic findings of 12 OCT 2016 as well as examiner's clinical experience. Other notes from exam: [X]     (1-3 METs)  This METs level has been found to be consistent with activities such as eating, dressing, taking shower, slow walking (2mph) for 1-2 blocks Does the Veteran's heart condition(s) impact his or her ability to work? [X] Yes  
    • Bump!  No help?????  :( 
    • Yes  either way is acceptable ,but word of caution be sure they write in Dark ink  or type it out...reason why? everything you submit will be placed in your C-File and at the present VA is changing over to the digitized format and they copy all our records now  by  Imaging process to scan and copy over to be digitized and put on CD. It  usually will not copy light  pencil or other light writen copy's  so make sure all your copy's of anything is either type out or written in dark pencil or  type in black ink  so their scanner imaging can read it to copy. jmo  
    • check out the ''Duty to Assist''  and also the VCAA. If the VA & examiner failed to read your service records or any evidence from you  then they failed to Duty to Assist Rule.
    • Worked for me