Partial win now on to the next step...

[rpowell01]

As most of you know I have had many, many problems with my spine from C2 all the way down into my S1. Yesterday I received my SOC but also with the SOC was a new decision stating the RO changed my bilateral upper extrmitiy radiculopathy from denied to approved to 10% each. This doesn't move me up the scale any as I am still at 80% and on IU. But of course they still denied the right leg radiculopathy claim from 2011.

I kind of find it hilarious reading over the SOC because its really no difference than the denial letter I received back in 2011 except they also decided to add the C&P exams I have AFTER the 2011 claim for right leg radiculopathy was already decided on. What is so hilarious they talk about this exam or that exam or something about me having a heel insert (which was given to me by the Army MD who treated me for over a year) but not once, NOT ONCE, did they even mentions Dr. Bash's NEXUS reports (two of them) that connected everything. They also didn't even mention the 2013 EMG I had that showed bilateral lower extremity radiculopathy. Isn't that hilarious? The VA broke their own policies and rules by omitting the very, very, very, very (must I say more) important 2013 EMG report. Heck its not even mentions whatsoever in the SOC nor even mentioned in the Evidence container they show they used. I am not worried because HOPEFULLY Dr. Bash will fulfill his agreement with me by going to the BVA hearing whenever the time comes and with me SUBMITTING the 2011 EMG report as evidence. 

Where I use to get upset with the denials I just smile away because I know in the end I will prevail because of both Dr. Bash's Nexus and exam he did (which is another thing they didn't even mention) and the EMG report. I'm just curious how can a C&P examiner make a determination such as my case of my legs without even ordering an EMG. Hilarious!!!!

[HitemStraight]

It is hilarious, I'm laughing with you .... They denied me for ulcerative-colitis, even though I had a nexus letter from my VA doc who treated me. Said the C & P examiner's opinion was 'more convincing' than the doc who treated me for 12 years. The C & P guy saw me for 30 minutes. Go figure !!

 

[Vync]

Congratulations for winning SC! It all adds up.

That's just crazy! Don't they know that if they screw up like that you are just going to appeal their stupidity?

[USMC_VET]

translation: "the examiners opinion is less favorable to you so its more believable in our world, thanks for participating in this objective non adversarial claim process! - yours truly, VA."

[green]

I wonder if it ever goes the other way.  For instance the C&P examiner is more favorable than other medical evidence and as such the VA decides to rely more heavily on the other evidence?

[rpowell01]

I swear these raters doesn't have the right glasses or they are picking up other staff's glasses. You know they also use the VA Optometrist and we all know they only have a few pair that are worth wearing so they could be accidentally picking up other folks glasses.

 

To be honest I just cannot wait for the BVA to get a hold of my case because I have this feeling they will slam this RO and the rater for omitting LEGAL and FEDERAL evidence from the record. Good thing, I have a plastic box I keep everything organized and copies on two extra hard drives to. I guess this would be a good time to ask the BVA to combine my current appeals into one since they are related? Example: With above SOC it only has my Right leg radiculopathy which is from a December 2010 claim. I currently have another appeal at the RO waiting and waiting and waiting that has my left leg radiculopathy. Couldn't I ask the BVA to combine both of these appeals into one for them to hear it since they are all related to my spine and they could affect each other on the outcome? Its called Inextricably Intertwined. Here is how the COURT says it "The Court has held that when a determination on one issue could have a significant impact on the outcome of another issue, such issues are considered Inextricably Intertwined and the VA are REQUIRED to decide those issues together. Harris v. Derwinski, 1 Vet. App. 180 (1991).

 

Maybe I need to request to the BVA in my reply to the SOC that I have another appeal currently at the RO that needs to be combined with this one. What do you all think, for those who know about this? This is not a BVA decision but a FEDERAL COURT Decision and the VA MUST comply with it.