EED vs 20 year Rule

[Buck52]

Question about the 20 year Rule?

When does  the time start for the 20 year Rule?

1. From time the time claim first Filed? & run concurrently.

2. From the time Approved? of the first claim filed? & run concurrently

If they go back to the EED  for retro and that is when veteran first filed then why can't that be the date of the 20 year Rule?

if a veteran has filed a claim and been in timely appeal  say 20 years and is approved and gets retro dated back to 20 years , in essence then he is eligible for the 20 year rule...correct?

some say when a veteran claim is  first approved then the time starts then on the 20 year rule?

but yet for retro on the EED they go by when a claim was first filed. providing the veteran has filed in a timely manner.

Anyone know on this for sure?

Thanks in Advance.

 

[Berta]

The 20 years start with the first EED and this must be a continuous 20 year rating:

https://www.hillandponton.com/protected-ratings-va-cant-reduce-rating/

[broncovet]

Alex got an eed to 1994.  He posted that, in 2014, he "made his 20".  

Yes, its not the Vets fault, the VA takes years to process his claim.  So, your effective date will mark the 20 year rule.  

The "effective date" is the date your claim became effective, and it affects your compensation as well as your protections.  

The "date of decison" is relevant mostly to you referring to the decision.  That is, "I disagree with your decision of April 20, 2017..."

You refer to the decision "by date", so its not confused with other decisions.  

[broncovet]

Remember, tho, you have SERIOUS protections at 5 years.  All of the top 2 paragraphs are protections of 5year OR P and T Vets:

 

Quote

 

§ 3.344 Stabilization of disability evaluations.

(a)Examination reports indicating improvement. Rating agencies will handle cases affected by change of medical findings or diagnosis, so as to produce the greatest degree of stability of disability evaluations consistent with the laws and Department of Veterans Affairs regulations governing disability compensation and pension. It is essential that the entire record of examinations and the medical-industrial history be reviewed to ascertain whether the recent examination is full and complete, including all special examinations indicated as a result of general examination and the entire case history. This applies to treatment of intercurrent diseases and exacerbations, including hospital reports, bedside examinations, examinations by designated physicians, and examinations in the absence of, or without taking full advantage of, laboratory facilities and the cooperation of specialists in related lines. Examinations less full and complete than those on which payments were authorized or continued will not be used as a basis of reduction. Ratings on account of diseases subject to temporary or episodic improvement, e.g., manic depressive or other psychotic reaction, epilepsy, psychoneurotic reaction, arteriosclerotic heart disease, bronchial asthma, gastric or duodenal ulcer, many skin diseases, etc., will not be reduced on any one examination, except in those instances where all the evidence of record clearly warrants the conclusion that sustained improvement has been demonstrated. Ratings on account of diseases which become comparatively symptom free (findings absent) after prolonged rest, e.g. residuals of phlebitis, arteriosclerotic heart disease, etc., will not be reduced on examinations reflecting the results of bed rest. Moreover, though material improvement in the physical or mental condition is clearly reflected the rating agency will consider whether the evidence makes it reasonably certain that the improvement will be maintained under the ordinary conditions of life. When syphilis of the central nervous system or alcoholic deterioration is diagnosed following a long prior history of psychosis, psychoneurosis, epilepsy, or the like, it is rarely possible to exclude persistence, in masked form, of the preceding innocently acquired manifestations. Rating boards encountering a change of diagnosis will exercise caution in the determination as to whether a change in diagnosis represents no more than a progression of an earlier diagnosis, an error in prior diagnosis or possibly a disease entity independent of the service-connected disability. When the new diagnosis reflects mental deficiency or personality disorder only, the possibility of only temporary remission of a super-imposed psychiatric disease will be borne in mind.

(b)Doubtful cases. If doubt remains, after according due consideration to all the evidence developed by the several items discussed in paragraph (a) of this section, the rating agency will continue the rating in effect, citing the former diagnosis with the new diagnosis in parentheses, and following the appropriate code there will be added the reference “Rating continued pending reexamination ___ months from this date, § 3.344.” The rating agency will determine on the basis of the facts in each individual case whether 18, 24 or 30 months will be allowed to elapse before the reexamination will be made.

(c)Disabilities which are likely to improve. The provisions of paragraphs (a) and (b) of this section apply to ratings which have continued for long periods at the same level (5 years or more). They do not apply to disabilities which have not become stabilized and are likely to improve. Reexaminations disclosing improvement, physical or mental, in these disabilities will warrant reduction in rating.

[ 26 FR 1586, Feb. 24, 1961; 58 FR 53660, Oct. 18, 1993]

 

These are some serious protections.  Section (C) above explains that paragraphs a and b only apply to P and T or those over 5 years.    I have read a lot on this. The "under ordinary conditions of life", stated above, means "while working", since "ordinary people work" while disabled people dont.  

You see, because of the "benefit of the doubt", Vets keep their rating (100 percent), unless they go back to work.  

This is a reg, that makes sense.  

If you fell throught the cracks, got too high of a rating, and went to work, then, yes, you were probably rated too high.  However, if you suffered long and can not work again, then you are not under ordinary conditions of life. 

 

In short, the VA has great difficulty reducing a P and T, unless he shows "actual improvement" under ordinary condtions of life.  

Remeber when the VA rates you as P and T, and they come back later and try to reduce it, they are essentially trying to cue themselves...you know, you are permantly disabled, but now you are not permanent.  

[Buck52]

ok

Heres my story

 I first filed in 1998 and was denied & appealed but they came back & Service connected me at 0% in 1999 &no rating other than the S.C. Established.

OK 1999 applied for increase and was awarded 50% (cue right there but I never knew it's my fault)(Member Flip H) was helping me and he caught  but I never filed the CUE. (My stupidly)

Then in 2002 applied for increase and was sent to a botched up C&P   Unfortunately for me the examiner tried his best to have my S.C. & 50% Taken away   he had predetermined my exam  and I proved he did. With help from my VA VOC-Rehab counselor and my spouse as whiteness.

 Anyway at a DRO Hearing  I had a specialist IMO letter and I won my case and that is when they over turn the C&P EXAMINER & Used my private specialist impression because he examined me and went into more proven details about my case (remember this was in 2002)...I was awared TDIU P&T as my condition was chronic in nature  and no future exams scheduled.

(DRO AND A RATING SPECIALIST PRESENT AT MY HEARING, AND THE DRO ASK ME IF  I WAS WILLING TO TAKE ANOTHER  C&P EXAM AT A DIFFERENT  VA HOSPITAL?  I SAID YES SIR , THE RATING SPECIALIST SPOKE UP AND SAID I DON'T BELIEVE THAT WILL BE NECESSARY THIS VETERAN HAS ENOUGH EVIDENCE TO PROVE HIS CASE.

They paid me retro and said my EED Was back to 1999  the date I first filed for increase, so would this be my 20 yer Rule date? or the 2002 Award on the Increase? &TDIU P&T?

FROM 1999 TO 2017  18 YEARS...SO I need two more years for my 20 year rule correct?

[Buck52]

A Ms berta put up a link from hil&ponton .com  ( attorneys)

They state this at the bottom!

''The combined rating of the separate disabilities equals or is greater than the rating assigned to the prior single disability, and

The effective date of for the separate disabilities is the same effective date of the prior single disability.

This means that the now separate disabilities both have their own protected rating. Also, the veteran’s combined rating will be protected.''

 

Also they mention that if a veteran has a secondary disability that was caused by the first original disability  that it goes back to the original date of the first disability for the 20 year rule.

When a veteran completes his 20 year rule does the VA send him/her a letter stating so?

Tags: disability rating reduction, The 20 Year Rule, VA P

Edited April 24, 2017 by Buck52

[Papa]

I have never understood this at all. How can they rate someone P&T, but put a timeframe on it?  Has anyone ever challenged the 20 year rule, to maybe 10 years, or do away with it all together? 

 

    PaPa