vlb-all-products

vlb-c-file-manual


  • Topics

  • Member Statistics

    • Total Members
      16,016
    • Most Online
      3,604

    Newest Member
    Thomas54
    Joined
  • Forum Statistics

    • Total Topics
      61,364
    • Total Posts
      395,790
  • Posts

    • I think you mean SMRs, or STRs (your inservice medical records.) For any claim filed ,the VA needs an inservice nexus. That is usually found in a veteran's SMRs. If you tell us why they denied (their actual reasons and bases can be scanned with the evidence list and attached here.) Cover your C file #, name, address prior to scanning it..we could help more. Often VA will state they reviewed the SMRs and found the SMRs were "silent" for any nexus. That is not always the case at all.Some are loud and clear. I think they spend 5 minutes on reviewing SMRs and many of us here have spent days and weeks on them.  
    • Hello everyone, A few days ago I was approved for SSDI and a direct deposit was posted to my account. I have been drawing California State Disability since 1/6/2016 and understand that as far as SDI is concerned, I can draw both at the same time.  However, it is also my understanding that the SSDI used an "offset" formula to reduce the total combined government benefits to not more than 80% of that the SSDI website calls "average current earnings" income?  The Social Securty pamphlet; "How workers compensation and other disability payments may effect your benefits" page 4, reads "we use different formulas to calculate your average current earnings". The information I was able to find is as follows: 504.3What is average current earnings? “Average current earnings” is the highest of: Your average monthly wage upon which your un-indexed disability primary insurance amount is based (see Chapter 7); Your average monthly earnings from covered employment and self-employment during the highest five years in a row after 1950; or Your average monthly earnings based on the single calendar year of highest earnings from covered employment. This single calendar year can be the year that your disability began or any of the five years immediately proceeding the year your disability began.   My income for the past five years is as follows (2013 being highest amount): 2015 $72,421
      2014 $72,934
      2013 $98,924   <--------
      2012 $83,397
      2011 $76,085

      My current SDI monthly income is:  $3,272
      My current SSDI monthly income is $2,324
      -----------------------------------------------------
      Total government SDI/SSDI            $5,596 $98,924 dived by 12 =                    $8,243 $5,596 dived by $8,243 =               67.88% of my income in 2013 The question:
      Based on my math and understanding of the rules, it appears to me that I will not have an offset applied to my SSDI?   (I have four months of SDI remaining) Any comments would be great. Mark
                                   
    • Prayers from me too Buck......try not to worry too much..... (which is so hard to do......)
    • http://www.dtic.mil/whs/directives/forms/eforms/dd0149.pdf Just put "not applicable" to the in 'injustice' part. Copy ,sign and send to the appropriate address, as directed on the form.  





Tbird

"is Due To", "more Likely Than Not", "at Least As Likely As Not" What Do These Mean?

6 posts in this topic

"is due to" (100% sure)

"more likely than not" (greater than 50%)

"at least as likely as not" (equal to or greater than 50%)

"not at least as likely as not" (less than 50%)

"is not due to" (0%)

http://www.hadit.com...help_guide.html

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites



I recently had a C&P where the examiner stated "is as likely as not 50/50"

What would the RO rater do with that?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

That would be a good plus with all the other evidence you have for your claim. Especially, when the rater see's that the examiner is one of thier own Dr.

Good Luck JHawks!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

This is some great info, thanks for posting it.

The phrase that bothers me, and doesn't really seem to get enough attention, is that crap about "unable to opine without resorting to mere speculation". From what I'm gathering, that is a below-the-belt way for a sneaky C&P nurse to basically try and taint any opinions you have from actual medical professionals (not N.P. doctor wannabes). They seem to be trying to use it in the context that not just they, but any medical person could not offer an opinion in your favor based on any medical or historical facts.

Is there any official VA information on that "mere speculation" copout phrase?

Further, and even more exasperating, on my C&P report the N.P. uses the "mere speculation" statement for a number of conditions I am claiming, then each time she proceeds to give an opinion anyhow, just a negative one. So in fact, she is admitting she can't give a valid opinion, but she turns around and tries to shoot me down. Why should her "mere speculation" carry any probative weight whatsoever? At the point where a C&P N.P. says they can't give an opinion, the VA should tell them to just shut the heck up.

I have some great nexus letters from actual doctors. I hope they will be given more value than the rantings of a second-rate digital rectal examiner who hasn't enough confidence in her knowledge to actually offer a true opinion.

JHawks, everything I've seen tells me that when a C&P examiner gives you the "at least as likely as not" opinion, you're probably very likely to see SC for that condition. Best of luck!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

acesup,

In my opinion, "unable to opine without resorting to mere speculation" is inserted by the examiner so they do not have to spend any more time on your case. Instead, they go to lunch, leave for the day, or whatever. In the case of your NP, they probably were heading to the movies.

Your right about probative weight. The RO swears up and down by having the correct jargon (per T-bird's first post). They will not accept a private opinion labeled 'probably", which in all right should mean 50/50 and they treat it negatively. Regarding "mere speculation", should it also mean 50/50? I had one claim where I was given "mere speculation", but the RO awarded SC based on relative equipoise and a lot of supporting evidence.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Further, and even more exasperating, on my C&P report the N.P. uses the "mere speculation" statement for a number of conditions I am claiming, then each time she proceeds to give an opinion anyhow, just a negative one. So in fact, she is admitting she can't give a valid opinion, but she turns around and tries to shoot me down. Why should her "mere speculation" carry any probative weight whatsoever? At the point where a C&P N.P. says they can't give an opinion, the VA should tell them to just shut the heck up.

I have some great nexus letters from actual doctors. I hope they will be given more value than the rantings of a second-rate digital rectal examiner who hasn't enough confidence in her knowledge to actually offer a true opinion.

acesup,

The C&P report by the N.P., will more likely than not be signed off on

by a MD.

When the decision maker applies weight to the evidence, hopefully they will pay attention

to the "great nexus letters from actual doctors" realize this puts the medical evidence in

relative equipoise and apply the BOD, in your favor.

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