I am new and posted much of what I am copy/pasting in another forum. However, I did not get much of a reply on that forum and thought I would try here. I will try to be as clear as I can, feel free to ask questions.
I will try to make this short and simple. I was discharged in 2003 for Supraventricular tachycardia. I found out after leaving the Army that they damaged my AV node and they took someone else's heart monitor and put my name on it (documented by VA cardiologist). The problem is that by putting my name on the other monitor and not my monitor, I received a 10% and not 30% rating in 2003. I have been fighting this for many years once a VA cardiologist pointed out the issue. I had a BVA hearing 2 years ago and just received my remand decision. I stressed the importance of the monitor that was miss identified and had a VA cardiologist document in 2009 that the heart monitor from 2003 was not my monitor and someone else's monitor. The judges remand said that I had to get current evidence, as that was too old of evidence for the increase in rating (she didn't once mention how I had false labs placed in my chart). This is my only issue that I have been fighting and I will post my timeline and then my questions. I have followed this board for 2 years but I can't seem to find an answer to this question, so I joined and am now posting.
Timeline (because I searched timelines all the time):
03/31/2009
Local VA Office Decision
RO
11/09/2009
Notice of Disagreement (NOD)
RO
11/16/2009
Appeal Pending
RO
03/17/2010
Statement of the Case (SOC)
RO
04/09/2010
Substantive Appeal (Form 9)
RO
01/11/2011
Supplemental Statement(s) of the Case (SSOC)
RO
07/27/2011
Certification of Appeal
RO
12/29/2011
Received by BVA
BVA
12/29/2011
Administrative Case Processing
BVA
10/15/2013
With VLJ
BVA
10/15/2013
With VLJ
BVA
10/23/2013
With VLJ
BVA
11/18/2013
With VLJ
BVA
11/19/2013
Pending Dispatch
BVA
11/19/2013
Decision & Claims File Dispatch
AMC
11/21/2013
Decision & Claims File Dispatch
AMC
Since it is now at the AMC you can all understand that I am in a remand.
My letter:
The Issue: Entitlement to a rating in excess of 10 percent for supraventricular tachycardia.
The introduction states:
This matter comes before the BVA on appeal from March 2009 rating decision issued by the VA RO in Muskogee, OK.
They had a quick review of my hearing and additional evidence
This paragraph was in bold and one of my questions (I was never seeking a secondary issue):
The issue of entitlement to service connection for degenerative mitral valve disease, to include as secondary to service-connected supraventricular tachycardia, has been raised by the record, but has not been adjudicated by the Agency of Original Jurisdiction (AOJ). Therefore, the board does not have jurisdiction over it, and it is referred to the AOJ for appropriate action.
The appeal is REMANDED to the RO via the AMC in Washington DC.
Questions:
1) Can I not do anything about them discharging me under false laboratory findings, as I have a VA cardiologist and private cardiologist that says that is not my heart monitor?
2) I did not ask for the mitral valve to be a secondary condition but additional evidence to the chronic supra ventricular tachycardia. Are they starting their own claim to make this a secondary issue? What date do they use, my appeal or the order date?
3) They want evidence between the time I filed the appeal (when I found out about the errors in my medical records) but also said in the remand that I am to have an examination. The issue is that I had way more recorded episodes when I left the army than they want to use. However, the VA has agreed to count 4 recorded episodes but I need 5 recorded episodes to get the increase I am seeking. The examination criteria says "It is left to the examiner's professional judgment whether the veteran needs to be monitored by ECG or Holger monitor to satisfactorily complete this examination." but the requirements the BVA stated earlier said I had to have 5 recorded episodes. Should I allow the doctor to submit an opinion or require the doctor to put a 30 day holter monitor on me? I can get the needed recordings if they put a 30 day monitor on me.
4) Should I get a lawyer at this point? I have use VFW thus far.
Thank you for any feedback. I will probably think of more questions but these are the big four.
This was what I posted after talking to my VSO......
I finally got my VSO to return my call (they are 3 hours away making a day drive impossible with work). He suggested I fill out a DD form 149 and have the board review the MEB discharge and change my discharge from 10% to 30%.
As far as the secondary issue goes, he said the AMC will review the mitral valve and make a decision as secondary issue to the SVT. If they deny it, the BVA judge can then make a final ruling. I was told that it should most likely be approved because the judge implied that she felt it was raised by the record in her remand. That was promising news as I was getting frustrated.
I have not received anything from the AMC as of yet. I hope this doesn't take another 2 years for a blatant error the RO refuses to acknowledge.
Question
jeeperrs
I am new and posted much of what I am copy/pasting in another forum. However, I did not get much of a reply on that forum and thought I would try here. I will try to be as clear as I can, feel free to ask questions.
I will try to make this short and simple. I was discharged in 2003 for Supraventricular tachycardia. I found out after leaving the Army that they damaged my AV node and they took someone else's heart monitor and put my name on it (documented by VA cardiologist). The problem is that by putting my name on the other monitor and not my monitor, I received a 10% and not 30% rating in 2003. I have been fighting this for many years once a VA cardiologist pointed out the issue. I had a BVA hearing 2 years ago and just received my remand decision. I stressed the importance of the monitor that was miss identified and had a VA cardiologist document in 2009 that the heart monitor from 2003 was not my monitor and someone else's monitor. The judges remand said that I had to get current evidence, as that was too old of evidence for the increase in rating (she didn't once mention how I had false labs placed in my chart). This is my only issue that I have been fighting and I will post my timeline and then my questions. I have followed this board for 2 years but I can't seem to find an answer to this question, so I joined and am now posting.
Timeline (because I searched timelines all the time):
03/31/2009
Local VA Office Decision
RO
11/09/2009
Notice of Disagreement (NOD)
RO
11/16/2009
Appeal Pending
RO
03/17/2010
Statement of the Case (SOC)
RO
04/09/2010
Substantive Appeal (Form 9)
RO
01/11/2011
Supplemental Statement(s) of the Case (SSOC)
RO
07/27/2011
Certification of Appeal
RO
12/29/2011
Received by BVA
BVA
12/29/2011
Administrative Case Processing
BVA
10/15/2013
With VLJ
BVA
10/15/2013
With VLJ
BVA
10/23/2013
With VLJ
BVA
11/18/2013
With VLJ
BVA
11/19/2013
Pending Dispatch
BVA
11/19/2013
Decision & Claims File Dispatch
AMC
11/21/2013
Decision & Claims File Dispatch
AMC
Since it is now at the AMC you can all understand that I am in a remand.
My letter:
The Issue: Entitlement to a rating in excess of 10 percent for supraventricular tachycardia.
The introduction states:
This matter comes before the BVA on appeal from March 2009 rating decision issued by the VA RO in Muskogee, OK.
They had a quick review of my hearing and additional evidence
This paragraph was in bold and one of my questions (I was never seeking a secondary issue):
The issue of entitlement to service connection for degenerative mitral valve disease, to include as secondary to service-connected supraventricular tachycardia, has been raised by the record, but has not been adjudicated by the Agency of Original Jurisdiction (AOJ). Therefore, the board does not have jurisdiction over it, and it is referred to the AOJ for appropriate action.
The appeal is REMANDED to the RO via the AMC in Washington DC.
Questions:
1) Can I not do anything about them discharging me under false laboratory findings, as I have a VA cardiologist and private cardiologist that says that is not my heart monitor?
2) I did not ask for the mitral valve to be a secondary condition but additional evidence to the chronic supra ventricular tachycardia. Are they starting their own claim to make this a secondary issue? What date do they use, my appeal or the order date?
3) They want evidence between the time I filed the appeal (when I found out about the errors in my medical records) but also said in the remand that I am to have an examination. The issue is that I had way more recorded episodes when I left the army than they want to use. However, the VA has agreed to count 4 recorded episodes but I need 5 recorded episodes to get the increase I am seeking. The examination criteria says "It is left to the examiner's professional judgment whether the veteran needs to be monitored by ECG or Holger monitor to satisfactorily complete this examination." but the requirements the BVA stated earlier said I had to have 5 recorded episodes. Should I allow the doctor to submit an opinion or require the doctor to put a 30 day holter monitor on me? I can get the needed recordings if they put a 30 day monitor on me.
4) Should I get a lawyer at this point? I have use VFW thus far.
Thank you for any feedback. I will probably think of more questions but these are the big four.
This was what I posted after talking to my VSO......
I finally got my VSO to return my call (they are 3 hours away making a day drive impossible with work). He suggested I fill out a DD form 149 and have the board review the MEB discharge and change my discharge from 10% to 30%.
As far as the secondary issue goes, he said the AMC will review the mitral valve and make a decision as secondary issue to the SVT. If they deny it, the BVA judge can then make a final ruling. I was told that it should most likely be approved because the judge implied that she felt it was raised by the record in her remand. That was promising news as I was getting frustrated.
I have not received anything from the AMC as of yet. I hope this doesn't take another 2 years for a blatant error the RO refuses to acknowledge.
Any additional comments will be appreciated.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Top Posters For This Question
31
5
3
3
Popular Days
Dec 4
6
Apr 4
4
Mar 3
4
Mar 11
3
Top Posters For This Question
jeeperrs 31 posts
les 5 posts
FormerMember 3 posts
stanval 3 posts
Popular Days
Dec 4 2013
6 posts
Apr 4 2014
4 posts
Mar 3 2014
4 posts
Mar 11 2014
3 posts
Popular Posts
FormerMember
That's plagiarism. You must have read my book. cp
jeeperrs
FINALLY! I received my SSOC tonight and they awarded me 30% for my SVT. However, the AMC is only awarding retro to Sep 2009 because that is when they "captured evidence indicating 5 episodes in a yea
thomasc
Congrats, I think asknod owes you $100, maybe someone at the AMC read his post.
51 answers to this question
Recommended Posts
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 accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now