Jump to content

Leaderboard

Popular Content

Showing content with the highest reputation since 07/24/2021 in all areas

  1. I finally received my decision letter granting me TDIU permanent and total. Where can I find out about all the benefits associated with the grant. I read someone's post awhile back concerning free insurance. I want to personally thank everyone on this site. I couldn't have gotten here without your help. I urge every Vet I come in contact with to visit this site for advice and help. Me and my family are truly grateful and blessed !!!!!!
    2 points
  2. I have a claim in appeal for well over two decades going from BVA to the CAVC then back to the BVA to be granted, to increased, to reduced, to restored and back to BVA for the final rating percentage. While all this has been going on, I was granted 100% scheduler P & T and the BVA still have not completed my appeal.
    2 points
  3. I agree with Scottish Knight, especially "the VA is clueless". Are you wearing hearing aid(s)? In a nutshell you take the "Average". To determine the average, add up the numbers the audiologist wrote on "1000", 2000,3000,and 4000. Then divide that total by 4 to determine average. I will do it for your right, you do the left: (from your chart). 20 plus 50, plus 55, plus 65 equals 190. Divide by 4 is 47.5 (use 48). So your average for right is 48. You then use your speech discrimination percent on the bottom of the chart for each ear. Then you can plug into chart and get your disability percentage rating. Im teaching you to do it rather than just do it all.
    2 points
  4. Hello Everyone Just thought I'd give y'all an update on my wife health. She seen the surgeon yesterday, her recommendation was to have another drain tube installed to help the other two that she has now,(to help speed up the draining of the infection) although she said the drain lines are doing what they are supposed to do , its a slow slow process draining out the gangrene infection and its still has to much infection to do the surgery, it needs to drain out more. so she was placed on a low fat diet (she can eat real food now) unless it hurts her lower stomach /gallbladder area) the antibiotics are working but like the Dr said its a slow process due to the gangrene infection and its in her blood system ,so they rely on the antibiotics for that...and the drain tubes. she is talking now and recognizes people and still in her right mind thank God, So after yesterday seeing the surgeon the Dr said she was slowly showing improvement but she wants to keep her in the Hospital for the care she been getting and add that extra drain tube and will see how she is in 2 more weeks. (the Doctors and Nurses at the Hospital are wonderful we could not got any better people...so were forever thankful for them. they help her and bend over backwards and do things that is not really a part of their jobs. (God Intervention) The Dr said this might have to take another 4/5 weeks it maybe Mid September before they can do the surgery , but will try before that depends on how the infection is? Because..right now there's just to much infection to do the surgery and it has a high risk...vs taking the conserved approach which we elected to do, the Dr Agreed. I wanted to Thank Everyone each and everyone of you that sent prayers for my wife (Brenda) we both know they do work and I believe she had a miracle ...because there at one time the Dr mention to the family be prepared for the worse but now she is not having the pain she did have she still has some but she can tolerate it much better, she is able to talk and ask for things and they start rehab on her today, she has not got up out that bed now going on 4 weeks straight,,she to weak to walk but there going to work on that. I feel so much better now and need to take care of some business and pick up around the house , my son and daughter law has been bringing me over a plate of food in the evenings. So please keep those prayers coming she is not out of the woods just yet..... God Is Good Everyone. We both Thank all of you for your prayers and compassion, we won't never forget that. I will return to hadit as soon as I can,,,I need to work on a CUE for EED myself...after an audit letter was sent to me and they could not go back to the dates I requested back to 1998 to present) said they don't have the records that go back that far.(1998).which is a blatant lie I have them in my C-file back to 1998..in turn they said I was not due any retro and the retro that was paid to me was correct. its not correct and now have to file a CUE. I am not so sure we can appeal an audit of our claims? God Bless Everyone here on Hadit and your Family's. Stay Safe and Well Everyone. Buck & Brenda
    2 points
  5. Well put nothing past the VA. I suggest waiting for your new award letter. Based on your post it is likely that the VA has sent you a separate award letter that should have the difference of your dependent pay on it. In your post, you stated that the VA awarded you an EED back to 1999 and that would have made your dependent eligible for dependent pay and the VA should have included that pay in your decision. It is possible that your new letter will show this difference and at the same time, it is possible that Ebenefits shows that you have no dependents because your dependent child is still beyond the age limit. Keep in mind that Ebenefits is supposed to show the current rating and your dependent child would not be on it because the child is well over the age limit. This would have nothing to do with an award letter for an EED for back/retro pay for your dependent. Back in 2014 the VA granted me a 2004 EED and I received my award letter and back pay. A few days later I received a second award letter for my dependent child that they left off. In 2019, the BVA granted me a 1998 EED that made my dependent child eligible for an EED and this time all my back/retro pay was included in my award letter, and I did not have to file a new claim. It is just a little too soon to know but your new letter may correct that they missed your dependent child off your award.
    2 points
  6. https://casetext.com/case/ollis-v-shulkin If you can prove an unforeseeable event caused you ( from the VA referral) to have additional ratable disability- then you could have a potential basis for 1151- but you would need to have a very strong medical opinion on that (IMO/IME) based on all of the VA and private care records. In my opinion, 1151 claims should be focused solely on VA treatment. and comply with the 1151 regulations ( in above BVA decisions). I realized long ago that ,if my husband had been referred to a private doctor, he would probably be alive today. I became the claimant after he died due to his two pending claims, one was his claim under 1151. The malpractice was overwhelming, and one VAMC tried to cover up the malpractice at another VAMC. They failed to cover it up. FTCA settlement and 1151 DIC award- wrongful death. We believed what the VA doctors said. They said he had a sinus infection but it was a heart attack and they never treated him for it or told us he had IHD. One thing every veteran should do is, if they begin to feel their VA care is wrong, is to get an Independent opinion from a non VA doctor with expertise in their disability. Years after I settled with VA for wrongful death I filed for an additional disease they malpractced on. BUT I filed for direct SC death and with 3 IMOs I won. My husband also had DMII from AO and the VA never diagnosed or treated the Diabetes, which was one more disability ,malpracticed on, that caused his death. I even found a Motive for the malpractice. But 1151ers do not need to find a VA motive for their (VA's) medical incompetence,they just need to prove it happened and caused them additional disability ( or death). I read a widow's 1151 case at BVA this AM, community care was somewhere in the case. But the widow had no proof of malpractice at all. If my Bill S 221 succeeds in the House ( it passed the Senate with no problem) the VA will be forced to properly account for these quacks. Then their actual malpractice statistics will be available to Congress and to the public. VA saves lives every day- I have no doubt of that and that most every veteran gets superb care from the VA. But my opinion says" most", not all veterans in the VA health care system.
    2 points
  7. If you have a standing ITF it's applied to the next claim you file. You can only have 1 itf at a time. https://benefits.va.gov/BENEFITS/factsheets/general/intenttofile.pdf
    2 points
  8. Thinders1951 Really important to add a new buddy letter (21-10210 to talk about how your current symptoms affect your daily life, physically, mentally and socially. Example: I no longer go out to lunch , etc. etc. with friends because I'm afraid I won't get to the bathroom in time, my meds make me..., Talk about what you can't enjoy now that you used to. Also up front on the letter refer to your doctor's letter to tie it together as part of your new evidence.
    1 point
  9. I found a few more BVA decisions that awarded tinnitus- "The Board finds that service connection for tinnitus is warranted. The Veteran has reported ongoing, recurrent tinnitus during the appeal period, and that his tinnitus began while he was a radio mechanic and equipment operator in the Army; he worked on and was in great proximity to running generators and was exposed to a great deal of noise. See May 2014 Form 9. " https://www.va.gov/vetapp21/files5/21031005.txt ----------------------------------- The veteran below had multiple grants from the BVA to include tinnitus, In part: "The Veteran seeks to establish service connection for cervical strain, right upper extremity radiculopathy, left upper extremity radiculopathy, right knee degenerative arthritis, left knee degenerative arthritis, and tinnitus. Specifically, the Veteran seems to assert that the VA examinations are inadequate; that his tinnitus is due to his MOS as a multichannel radio operator, and due to his service with the air defense artillery unit and loud weapons fire; and states that he developed such disorders during active service. See Third Party Correspondence, April 7, 2020; see also VA Form 20-0996 Request for Higher-Level Review, September 2, 2019." and also was on remand because VA failed to do many things under 38 CFR 4. etc and the wife gave a statement thus, that was given much weight by BVA. "In her statement, she stated that the Veteran’s claimed conditions started during his military service and had progressively worsened following service." This was not only an important statement for the many conditions the BVA granted but also it showed that the conditions, to include tinnitus, started in service and were 'continuous' from service. https://www.va.gov/vetapp21/files3/a21004927.txt I am not having luck finding a good place to find a buddy statement. But I do not use Facebook and there might be some vets there there who were in your unit. Did your Unit have a Nickname like the "Screaming Eagles" or "RED HORSE" ? ( my neighbor is 20 yrs Retired -RED HORSE- Rapid Engineer Deployable USAF)- sometimes a Nickname will produce a web site or forum that could hold reunion rosters etc with contact numbers-for buddy statements. But I dont think you will have any problems due to your MOS. My phone just rang , however, it was our radio show producer and it took him many years and some denials ,and one award for Tinnitus SC "0" rating, )to finally get his tinnitus service connected at 10%.
    1 point
  10. I agree with pacman. While I would think hard about having a hearing loss claim at the CAVC, and applying for hearing loss ALSO at the VARO, you can apply for another issue, such as a bad knee. Years ago, there was "ONE" paper copy of your records, so VSO's told Vets not to apply for ANYTHING until the present claim is completed. Now, any VA rating specialist can see your records online, (with VA issued passwords/usernames). The board can look at your records, a rating specialist, and CAVC judge, all 3 at the same time. That was not possible with "one" paper copy of your records.
    1 point
  11. IM SC for hearing loss, which the VARO denied. I was awarded at the BVA. My "MOS" (US Navy does not use that term, but its familiar to many), was not consistent with loud noises. However, in my appeal, I sent a map (from google) where my barracks was at the end of a runway, where I testified that the jets flew just a few feet from us frequently. I further testified that I was exposed to loud machinery that I operated, and gave the names and numbers of the machines, which I had studied in "A" school. "A" school is the school you take to "strike for a rating". You complete the school with a passing grade. Then, you are sent to your duty station, where, if you apply, you can take the test for "rating" ( a promotion..__). A "rating" in the USN was a part of your rank. In other words, in the Army you may be a "sargent", but in the Navy you would be a BT1 (Boilerman tender first class). There was no MOS per se, because your rating included your "specialty" as well as your rank. I understood that changed in 2016, where Navy are likewise now given a more generic rank, (i.e. First class Petty officer), instead of a more specific rating which included your rank and specialty, as the Navy did in the past. In short, there is no "MOS" for Navy. (At least not when I was in). The Navy assigned you duties, however, which may or may not be consistent with your specialty and training, and more on the needs of the Navy. The Navy used to have a rating called "radioman". Well that is pretty much obsolete, but the electronics training worked well in similar fields such as an electronic technician, or computer tech. Some ratings, such as Boilerman Tender, pretty much were assigned anywhere needed. However, the Navy knew your GCT-ARI scores so they pretty much kept you in a field consistent with your education and intelligence. My GCT-ARI was "top tier", where I qualified for everything, including Astronaut training. So, when I spoke with the vocation counselor, I told him I wanted to jump out of airplanes. He replied, "No, your GCT-ARI is too high. Anyone can jump out of an airplane. We need you in a high tech field which requires math skills and intelligence." I said, "Give me that test back and I will mark every other answer with none of the above". I found out later, God's hand was in this. That was the reason I was not sent to Viet Nam, they considered me smart and that I should do things which require intelligence. After the Navy, I went to college and fairly easily got my degree. I thought college was pretty much a repeat of high school, and breezed through it as I had done in high school. Its one thing my hearing loss helps with. A lot. I have to "intently" focus on the speaker. Reason: I will miss (be unable to hear/understand) some letters. "F" is hard to hear, for example, while the vowels are pretty easy for me to understand. Thus, to understand, I had to work cross word puzzles to understand what the speaker said. One hilarious example of this is a female friend told me she had an "email problem". Well, I told her I can help. (I knew about email and computers). She got mad and hung up on me. Later, I figured out she did not have "an email problem", she had a "female problem". I didnt get that cross word puzzle right. When someone speaks, and I miss a letter, I fire in possible consanants which make sense in context. My grandson kept talking about "heat" while I was making spagetti. He said he did not want any heat. I told him the spagetti isnt good cold. I have to apply heat. He repeated "no heat". I knew something was up. I asked my wife what he said. She said he said, "no meat", not no heat. He did not want MEAT in his spagetti, not heat. I have lots of trouble hearing "F" "th" and "S"
    1 point
  12. GBA is RIGHT 100 % !!!!!!!! I will do some more research on your unit- and can post any direct cnact info Ihave if I know the name of the VA Regional Office you deal with. It will take some time because, with a half hour here the roofer will be making lots of noise hard to think straight---- To bolster GBA's point- many of these raters/adjudicators at the RO, might well be veterans but that does not mean they understand many of the MOS's fr each branch of service ,and what those military duties actually involved. I noticed in many of the BVA decisions, that the veteran had detailed exactly how they were exposed to acoustical trauma. Some of them were not even born when the Vietnam War occurred.
    1 point
  13. Bangkokbill I could not find the same or identical MOS listing for radio op. Closest I found was MOS 25C Radio Op-Maintainer see this listing https://sdvsoa.weebly.com/uploads/1/1/5/9/115936913/duty_mos_noise_exposure_levels_2.pdf Search and see if you can find one in another branch. However, 25C has a moderate rating which will support your case. Berta again had great links for you on what the MOS codes; use that as part of your evidence. On your buddy letter you talk about specific instances which you remember it was especially hard ex. I was on the flight line and an F4 took off and my ears were ringing for 6 hours after" or, "the mos code training was for 8 straight hours 6 days in a row and everyone said that their ears were buzzing all day long from the constant pinging." If it was an event that was not related to your MOS but was an isolated event that you were exposed to, talk to that in length. This is you most important evidence you submit, so paint a picture what happened.
    1 point
  14. Sorry for the acronyms- VSO Veterans service officer BVA Board of Veterans Appeals-Washington DC I fund so far veterans who served in Germany who were radio operators and were awarded for Tinnitus. While a BVA decision only applies to the specific claimant- their decisions hold a wealth of info. This is in part: "Here, the Veteran contends that he incurred tinnitus due to noise exposure during his military service. See, e.g., Board hearing transcript dated March 2017. Specifically, he asserts that he was exposed to loud radio equipment noise, weaponry, and grenades while he was stationed in Germany as a communications specialist. He explains that during the course of his military occupational specialist (MOS), he was exposed to loud noises from his radio equipment, such as loud buzzing frequencies. Furthermore, during the March 2017 Board hearing, the Veteran testified that he experienced ringing in his ears since his military service. Id." "His DD-214 Form reflects that his MOS was a radio operator and a multichannel equipment operator, and that he was stationed in Germany as a multichannel equipment operator. His service treatment records reflect no complaint or diagnosis of tinnitus during service." "The Board has no reason to dispute the Veteran's credible lay statement concerning his in-service noise exposure. To this end, the Veteran's statements are consistent with his with his DD-214 Form. Therefore, his claimed exposure to loud noise is consistent with the circumstances, conditions, and hardships of his service, and is credible. See 38 U.S.C. § 1154 (a) (West 2012)." https://www.va.gov/vetapp17/files9/1759448.txt --------------------------------------------------------------------- Next one in part: "The Veteran contends that he has tinnitus, or ringing in the ears, which developed during active duty as a result of harmful noise exposure. At the outset, the Board notes that the Veteran has credibly reported experiencing ringing in his ears during the pendency of the appeal. Moreover, he was diagnosed with tinnitus during a November 2014 VA audiological examination. Thus, the Board finds that the current disability element has been met. Additionally, the Board finds that the in-service element has been satisfied. The Veteran’s personnel records reflect that he served as a radio operator, and he has reported (for example, in correspondence received in April 2018) “monitoring and communicating with high frequency [M]orse code for long periods of time”—a task which involved exposure to “constant high pitched screaming and ringing.” The Board accepts his contentions of harmful noise exposure in service. See 38 U.S.C. § 1154(a). Consequently, the only question on appeal is whether there is a link between his current tinnitus and in-service harmful noise exposure. After reviewing the record, the Board finds that the evidence supports the Veteran’s claim that his tinnitus originated in service. As noted above, the Veteran has reported ringing in his ears since being exposed to harmful noises in service. A VA audiological specialist has noted the Veteran’s reports of ringing in the ears since service, and diagnosed him with tinnitus. Although there is some negative evidence in the record regarding the Veteran’s claim, the positive evidence put forth by the Veteran of ringing in his ears during and after active service renders the nexus element to be at least in equipoise. As such, a nexus to service is shown and service connection will be granted. See 38 C.F.R. §§ 3.303(b), 3.309(a); see also Charles v. Principi, 16 Vet. App. 370, 374 (2002)." https://www.va.gov/vetapp19/files10/19177782.txt I need to mention that the NPRC problems were reported on TV about a week ago- They do suffer a tremendous backlog, but the problem is probably at your RO. If you give us the name of your Regional Office ( VARO) I can post some contact info here- tomorrow----(in midst of men working on my home ,it has been hectic) GBA made a good point too- I bet your unit has a web site- if you tell us the exact unit designation of your DD214, you might find info on the site and maybe even be able to contact a "buddy" to verify the proximity to flight line or the other things you mentioned as to the acoustical trauma you were exposed to. By unit designation I mean like this I use my deceased husband's as example "1stMARDIV, 1st Amphibious tractor Battalion, USMC Danang Vietnam 1965" (it was originally 3rd Marines but Admiral Zumwalt changed that) You said :" We also used loud generators to power our mobile radio trailer. " That would be great evidence if you can get that verified by a buddy- but your MOS alone might do it-- I will try to find our acronym help list You said "I remember the NCO instructors shaking their heads saying why bother, a monkey can key a radio mike- and they were right." Yeah! Ha Ha
    1 point
  15. Vync and all Veterans beware- Please think twice when filing SF95/FTCA claims. If you are SC for any disability and receiving compensation, and they grant the FTCA with a monetary award, your VA compensation will cease until they recoup the money they paid you in the FTCA settlement. It falls in the §4.14 clause about no pyramiding, technically. Basically, you can only be remunerated once for your disability(ies) with govt. funds. I had this happen to a client before they sought my representation. They received a $100,000 FTCA settlement and poof- VA comp. ceased until the amount ($100,000) was recouped (about 3 years) whereupon the VA comp. began again.
    1 point
  16. I should add that Berta's posting has "Turning next to service incurrence, the Board finds that the Veteran was exposed to excessive levels of noise in service, based on his consistent statements regarding in-service noise exposure related to his MOS. The Board also notes that while the Veteran’s specific MOS isn’t listed in VA’s Duty Military Occupational Specialty (MOS) Noise Exposure Listing, military personnel having an MOS of Engineer have for the most part been determined to have a moderate to high probability of noise exposure." That can be a very good legal reference if it applies to you.--------------------
    1 point
  17. The MOS criteria I posted ,can help: "The claim of entitlement to service connection for right shoulder disability, diagnosed as osteoarthritis and impingement syndrome, is granted. The claim of entitlement to service connection for left shoulder disability, diagnosed as osteoarthritis and impingement syndrome arthritis, is granted. The claim of entitlement to service connection for a right-hand finger disability, diagnosed as trigger finger, is granted. The claim of entitlement to service connection for a left-hand finger disability, diagnosed as trigger finger, is granted. The claim of entitlement to service connection for bilateral hearing loss is granted. The claim of entitlement to service connection for tinnitus is granted. FINDINGS OF FACT 1. The Veteran’s assertions of in-service noise exposure and the performance of strenuous duties associated with his military occupational specialty (MOS) are credible and consistent with the circumstances of his service." https://www.va.gov/vetapp20/files7/20044653.txt ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------ "The Veteran was exposed to excessive levels of noise during service. 2. Bilateral hearing loss was not shown in service or for many years thereafter and is not related to service. 3. The Veteran's bilateral tinnitus was incurred in service. "CONCLUSIONS OF LAW 1. The criteria for service connection for bilateral hearing loss are not met. 38 U.S.C. §§ 1101, 1110, 1111, 1112, 1113, 1131, 1137, 5107; 38 C.F.R. §§ 3.102, 3.303, 3.307, 3.309, 3.385. 2. The criteria for service connection for bilateral tinnitus are met. 38 U.S.C. §§ 1101, 1110, 1112, 1113, 1131, 1137, 5107(b); 38 C.F.R. §§ 3.102, 3.303, 3.307, 3.309." https://www.va.gov/vetapp19/files2/19111592.txt In Part: "Turning next to service incurrence, the Board finds that the Veteran was exposed to excessive levels of noise in service, based on his consistent statements regarding in-service noise exposure related to his MOS. The Board also notes that while the Veteran’s specific MOS isn’t listed in VA’s Duty Military Occupational Specialty (MOS) Noise Exposure Listing, military personnel having an MOS of Engineer have for the most part been determined to have a moderate to high probability of noise exposure." -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- In this case.... In Part: "We note that, although the Veteran does not have a hearing loss disability for VA compensation purposes, the examiner did provide a positive nexus opinion for the Veteran's high threshold left ear hearing loss. The examiner noted the Veteran's military occupational specialty (MOS) during service was field artillery, which carries a high probability for hazardous noise. The Veteran had reported significant noise exposure including 105- and 155-millimeter howitzer artillery pieces in combat and training and aircraft and helicopters." and "Here, the credible evidence supports the claim and service connection for tinnitus is warranted." https://www.va.gov/vetapp21/files6/21037517.txt My note here- remember you guys had No real type of acoustical protection during the Vietnam War-at all. And the ear plug lawsuit is advertised on google and tv- https://earplugs.injurymatch.com/int/?cid=1211&afid=3&project=Earplugs&usid=11260499982|military earplugs lawsuit-b&sid=GoogleSearch&msid=CjwKCAjwo4mIBhBsEiwAKgzXOAVyIAGGyHiqmwjFmlEBFcNec7FmIqORXeVDBbp5jxY5IVrgBvjhiRoCVNoQAvD_BwE&st-t=GoogleAds&vt-k=11260499982&vt-p=&vt-n=g&vt-d=c&vt-dm=&vt-c=military earplugs lawsuit&vt-t=118020728530&vt-ap=&utm_source=google&utm_medium=cpc&utm_campaign=11260499982&utm_content=118020728530&utm_term=524417910620&vt-p1=118020728530&vt-p2=524417910620&gclid=CjwKCAjwo4mIBhBsEiwAKgzXOAVyIAGGyHiqmwjFmlEBFcNec7FmIqORXeVDBbp5jxY5IVrgBvjhiRoCVNoQAvD_BwE
    1 point
  18. That is Superb advice from GBA! By all means go over this list: https://criteria.njarmyguard.com/wp-content/uploads/fast-10-35.pdf This is an update of the original Fast Letter 10-35 that has helped many veterans here, http://blog.finkrosnerershow-levenberg.com/wp-content/uploads/2015/02/Duty-MOS-Hearing-Loss-Probability-Chart-VA-Fast-Letter-10-35.pdf As this notable vet law firm states, tinnitus is almost always rated at 10% and no higher for one ear or both ears: https://cck-law.com/blog/secondary-conditions-to-tinnitus-va-disability/#:~:text=VA rates tinnitus under 38,takes both ears into account. The article also reveals some conditions that could be found as secondary to the tinnitus. You are only claiming tinnitus? And not hearing loss as well? You might well be able per your MOS on your DD 214, and with this updated VA Fast Letter , enhancing the initial 10- 35, to get a reasonable response on your claim.
    1 point
  19. Bankokbill Welcome to Hadit. The VA has a "duty to assist". The veteran doesn't have to provide copies of your military records or medical records; the VA is supposed to do the leg work. It takes longer if they do; we suggest you provide if you have the evidence yourself, that way it specifically part of your evidence for your claim. That said, they are supposed to but they often take the easy way out and say they couldn't get the records. What is in your records at the NPRC that you need to prove your claim? Is it your MOS that shows an increase of your opportunities to have exposure to loud noises? You can get that off your DD214. A statement in support of your claim, or Buddy Letter, may be a good substitute for your missing evidence. You do one on how the tinnitus affects your daily routine at work and interactions with others. Get another from someone who knew you before you experienced the disability, and how it affects you now.You can and should request a copy of whatever your missing thru a FOIA request, but know it's probably a year away because of the backlog. Lastly, as indicated by getting your MOS of your DD214, there may be alternative resources depending upon what evidence you are missing. Example: newspaper clipping from a car accident or a flight ticket. Without know what you need, I would just advise to be creative on trying to get what you need.
    1 point
  20. First, no one can explain ebenefits, certainly NOT VA. Its often inaccurate, wrong, or out of date. You need to look at the letter. Wait for it if you have not gotten it. However, "if" what you posted is correct, you got SMC S (its about $325 per month), for a year for your surgery. AFTER a year after your surgery, they often reduce your knee rating, but I have no idea if they have done so, as this does not say. YOur letter(s) from VA will offer more information. If you no longer have the letters, ask for copies. You may need to apply for an increase so you get SMC S now, also, and not just for a year in 2014. To get SMC S you need a single 100 percent plus a combined 60 percent, OR be housebound in fact.
    1 point
  21. A lot of veterans that are rated 100% scheduler or TDIU also get their SSDI (EARLY SOCIAL SECURITY DISABILITY INSURANCE). If you can prove that you can't work, you can collect both benefits. You are going to have to do some research and find out what is best for you and your family. I was told by my VA doctor to quit my office job, but I continued until I could not work, and things got worst. If you’re a government employee, you can also try to retire early.
    1 point
  22. VA claims 101: CALUZA ELEMENTS. Cover those, and get SC. Check your records to make sure: (Dont guess or "assume" this is in your records) 1. You have a current diagnosis of disability claimed. 2. You have documented an "in service event" which injured your back. 3. You need a letter from a doctor that says your "in service event" at least as likely as not caused your current diagnosis. Beyond this, you need "current symptoms". How often do you have back pain? If you can no longer work due to SC disabilties, then you can get TDIU. Yea, I know. the waiting period from when you are not working, until VA finally SC's you, is often long. Hopefully you have a large savings account. If you can work, keep working.
    1 point
  23. The VA will not a say you can't work anymore. Now if you can't work then you can get unemployability. Which would mean you already can't work. I am 100% P&T and I still work every day. It is an office job, but it works. It is fine to send this information in, but in a C&P exam they will probably want their own scan. Regardless of what you have. The VA has the duty to assist, and they almost always take this to the level of they need all the information as up to date as possible and they want it from the VA hospital or a contractor for the VA. Yes submit the information, and no they will not stop you from working.
    1 point
  24. Pacmanx1 is spot on...no one can hazard a real guess as to how the VA would react to finding out you're working after they've agreed that you're unemployable. The VA language includes the word "may" for those who work under the poverty level (i.e., you MAY be allowed to work). Each case is unique to itself. You said you'd like to work maybe 20 hours a week...California's minimum wage is $14.00 an hour, which (if my math's right) gives you roughly $14,500 a year (20 hours/wk at minimum wage). But the poverty level in 2021 is $12,880, which means your target of 20 hours will put you over the poverty level (if you live alone. The rate goes up as the household numbers do). Is your disability related to mental health? If so, you'll want to find out as well if 100% scheduler (due to mental health issues) allows one to work. There may be some sort of special rule in that instance, but I don't know. Good luck to you going forward...you do have a strange situation going on right now; hope it all works well for you. Cheers.
    1 point
  25. Dingo Getting "checked" at the VA for hearing doesn't necessarily mean it is the same as an exam for disability. VA Benefits (disability) avs.VA Health (health care.). Different systems and they don't talk to each other. I question the adequacy of the hearing exam. Did you get a copy of the medical report,. What were the values. If you didn't get them, get them. If you really want to do this, then get a private audiology test done and see what those values are. The VA uses a test method called the "Maryland Test." That is what you would use to compare apples to apples. If the results show you meet the min scale for compensation, submit a claim. However, since you are 100% P&T already, be sure you want to do it. What would you gain? If you are not clsoe to getting a SMC, I don't know that I would do it myself.
    1 point
  26. The bottom line is no one can really say what the VA would and would not do, we or they are not the ones making the decision and we do not have your file to review. It is totally up to the VA to make that decision and we can only speculate (GUESS). By guessing it would not help you or any other veteran thinking of doing the same thing. We get this question all the time. What I would say based on my experience is that you should consider yourself medically retired. File for early SSA benefits, file a claim for SSDI that will begin your early retirement pay. You can always start a hobby, or volunteer, a lot of members stick around to help out other veterans. Be forewarned what you ask for, as stated no one knows what the VA would do. If you go back to work, the VA could re-evaluate your rating and remove your TDIU, or they could try to say that you committed fraud, or they could reduce your 100% scheduler. There are too many scenarios that could play out but then again nothing may happen at all but why risk it. A 100% P & T scheduler veteran is not supposed to be re-evaluated, but you never know what could happen.
    1 point
  27. Well I attached the 2017 memo for you in case you need it. I used it as supplemental evidence when they tried that weight gain crap...and it ended their argument claim granted. You actually want them to go ahead and make the weight gain argument so once you present the memo they can't make something else up....unfortunately its a game to them VAOPGCPREC1-2017.pdf
    1 point
  28. It is hard to say without the letter being here. Because you child is too old now it could me for now, but maybe in the letter there is wording for the back pay of the dependent. There really is no way to know without the letter. It says CURRENTLY, this would be correct as they are too old.
    1 point
  29. Wico You could call "Peggy" at 800-827-1000 and ask for a copy. You should be able to get it after 10 business days. But what I think you really need to do is get a copy of your C-file, which will have a lot more info regarding your medical records and claims. Submit a FOIA request (20-10206) and sit back and wait. I also suggest that you submit an intent to file (21-0996)to try to establish as early as possible an effective date for your new claim. You have a year after submitting the intent to keep the date.
    1 point
  30. They tried to use the weight gain tactic against me when I filed claims for knees and back secondary to my already service connected pes planus and right ankle. The bad part is that when I originally filed the claims back in 2010 and had c&p exams in 2011, I was at my normal weight and not overweight at all. The claims were denied, went through the appeals process, and ultimately languished at the BVA and by the time the BVA remanded my claim back to the RO and I ended up getting new exams in 2017 or 2018 I had gained weight. The examiner blamed my age and weight on my knees and back issues. When I filed the claims I was 35 or 36 years old and at a healthy weight. I ultimately ended up having the claims granted and received a huge backpay.
    1 point
  31. Just remember that weight gain is not a ratable condition (generally but could be under certain circumstances). The VA often will use the argument that..."Well you gained weight so this new condition is a result of the weight gain and not your SC condition. This is false. weight can can be a "bridge" by the VA's own internal memo. So your argument will be something like this...Because of my SC condition i gained weight and that weight aggravates or caused the sleep apnea. Just be prepared for that especially if you bring up your weight gain...
    1 point
  32. Maybe back in the day. There are some Regional offices that are focused on certain claims but the majority of claims are processed electronically with the raters via Computer. The claims folders mainly are stuck in Janesville WI with the work being done by whoever it gets assigned to nationwide.
    1 point
  33. This is all I know about it: Stimulus Check Update: Homeowners Could Be Entitled to More Money by Christy Bieber | June 15, 2021 Image source: Getty Images If you're a homeowner, you may not have to wait for a fourth stimulus check to get your hands on more government money. If you're a homeowner, you may not have to wait for a fourth stimulus check to get your hands on more government money. The American Rescue Plan Act was signed into law by President Joe Biden in March and is best known for the $1,400 stimulus checks that it provided. Unfortunately, many Americans have long since spent this money and are now left hoping for a fourth stimulus check that will likely never come as Congress and the Biden administration have moved on to other priorities. But for homeowners, there's actually a possibility of more stimulus money coming even if lawmakers do not pass any further COVID-19 relief legislation. That's because the American Rescue Plan also provided $10 billion to a Homeowners Assistance Fund. Unlike the $1,400 stimulus checks, though, you will need to take action to get your part of this money if you're eligible for it. As a result, homeowners need to understand how the HAF works and what criteria they must meet in order to be eligible for additional stimulus money from it. Here's what you need to know: One email a day to could help you save thousands Tips and tricks from the experts delivered straight to your inbox that could help you save thousands of dollars. Sign up now for free access to our Personal Finance Boot Camp. By submitting your email address, you consent to us sending you money tips along with products and services that we think might interest you. You can unsubscribe at any time. Please read our Privacy Statement and Terms & Conditions. Stimulus money is available to certain homeowners Under the terms of the American Rescue Plan Act, homeowners can become eligible to receive stimulus money from the Homeowners Assistance Fund provided certain criteria are met. They must: Have an income that doesn't exceed 150% of the area median income Have experienced financial hardship after Jan. 21, 2020 and be able to provide proof of the hardship. Examples include healthcare expenditures or a job loss Have a mortgage balance below $548,250 as of 2021 For eligible borrowers, the money can be used for many different home-related expenses including: Mortgage payments Homeowners insurance Utility payments Other specified purposes The goal of the HAF fund in the American Rescue Plan Act was to help prevent homeowners from becoming delinquent on their loans; losing their utility services; going into default on their mortgage; or facing foreclosure. The law also makes clear that homeowners who have "experienced the greatest hardships" should be prioritized. How can homeowners get their stimulus money? The American Rescue Plan Act allocates money from the Homeowners Assistance Fund to the states. Each state will receive a minimum of $50 million. Washington D.C. and Puerto Rico will also receive at least $50 million. States will provide details about the application process and any specific eligibility limitations to homeowners within their borders. If you are interested in applying and hoping to get more financial relief from the federal government in your bank account, you should find your state's housing agency website to learn the details about applying in your area. While not every homeowner will get a piece of this additional stimulus money, it could be the best and only source of direct payments that's coming any time soon due to the fact that a fourth stimulus check is so unlikely to be authorized.
    1 point
  34. Hey @bionoce, I personally have not had one, but I did find this information sheet on the VA's web site: https://www.va.gov/HEALTHPARTNERSHIPS/docs/SGBforPTSD_508.pdf The sheet says it may be an option for vets who meet certain requirements. I would recommend you ask your VA provider about it. If you end up getting it, please consider sharing your experience both short and long term. It might be helpful for others.
    1 point
  35. For an increase, you need "evidence" your conditions worsened meeting the higher criteria levels. especially when these levels of disability were not documented at your c and p exam where you were awarded benefits, You dont need an IMO "if" you read your medical records and they document your current symptoms well AT THE PROPER EFFECTIVE DATE. If your current (worsened) symptoms are not documented, well, you need additional evidence. That is rarely provided with an IMO, because the doctor renders his opinion by reading your history. Instead you need a new medical EXAM, where a doctor can document your current worsened symptoms. Frankly, unless you are seeking an eed, becuause you applied earlier AND your c and p doc did not "give a date when your symptoms first began". In short, only a review of your medical records in your cfile can determine if an IMO will help you. I dont recommend wasting money for an IMO, until you read your file and see if its needed.
    1 point
  36. It's a contract C&P exam but it's still a medical record. At least in my opinion. Next Thursday will be 8 weeks since I faxed in my request. It's just a way for the VA to delay your claims. I understand what you're saying I guess I'm just venting.
    1 point
  37. If you are referring to a VAMC C & P exam, then it should be in your records at the VAMC, and you should be able to print them up in myhealthyvet.com under the blue button. If you are referring to a Contracted C & P exam, then those exams go back to the VARO, and they will not release the exams until after they make a decision. It normally takes about 8 weeks, but the VA log your request as a claim for FOIA and not just a request for your exams.
    1 point
  38. Thank you again for this topic!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! I found more cases that BVA remanded or awarded due to the Ollis Fed Circuit case: Added Remanded and another award 1151 non VA treatment https://www.va.gov/vetapp21/files3/21014183.txt ( VA referred to private treatment, after which veteran suffered seizures) https://www.va.gov/vetapp18/files4/18100987.txt ( VA referral to non VA entity - additional disability on remand) https://www.va.gov/vetapp18/files9/18134829.txt (Veteran was referred under Fee Basis to a non VA hospital can claimed residuals from hip replacement surgery) and "ORDER Entitlement to compensation pursuant to 38 U.S.C. § 1151 for hypoventilation syndrome with diaphragmatic paralysis (lung disability) is granted. Entitlement to compensation pursuant to 38 U.S.C. § 1151 for brachial plexus and phrenic nerve injuries (nerve disability) is granted. FINDINGS OF FACT 1. The Veteran was referred to a non-VA medical provider, where he underwent an August 2012 shoulder surgery. 2. The additional disabilities incurred as a result of the August 2012 shoulder surgery, to include lung disability and nerve disability were the result of an event not reasonably foreseeable." https://www.va.gov/vetapp21/files5/21027653.txt I am stunned at some of these cases. It is good to have this info here!!!!! ----------------------------------------------------------------------------
    1 point
  39. MB76 and all- I did a lot more digging at the BVA and found this: There are 435 1151 claims at the BVA regarding an unforeseeable event and I was able to find some whereby the VA sent the veteran to a private hospital where he incurred additional disability: "Viewing the evidence in the light most favorable to the Veteran, and using a referral theory pursuant to that used by the Federal Circuity in Ollis v. Shulkin, 857 F.3d 1338 (Fed. Cir. 2017), the Board finds that an unforeseeable event occurred during a VA recommended surgery by a non-VA facility and the unforeseeable event proximately caused the Veteran’s additional disability of severe weakness in the Veteran’s right arm." The VA had recommended the surgery. "Entitlement to compensation under 38 U.S.C. § 1151 for a right arm impairment, to include a severed nerve is granted." https://www.va.gov/vetapp21/files4/21024073.txt It changes the way I viewed this at first-Ollis V Shulkin went to a Federal Circuit Court. I only had the CAVC decision. The Ollis Fed Cir decision (2017) changed everything------I hope I can find it but BVA in their most recent 1151 cases with non VA referrals, uses it in each decision. Such as: "In this instance, the Veteran had a procedure performed at a private medical facility by a private physician. Therefore, under the law as written he previously would not have been eligible for compensation under section 1151. (As the claimed incident does not fall within the exception under the law indicated at 38 U.S.C. § 1701(6)(E), for noninstitutional extended care services at a private facility where furnished by VA by contractual arrangement.) However, since the Veteran filed his claim, there has been precedential case law issued from the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit (Federal Circuit), the holding in Ollis v. Shulkin, 857 F.3d 1338 (2017), which did not change the language of the law on medical negligence actions for treatment consequences performed by a third-party provider or at a non-VA facility, but significantly expanded the definition of “proximate causation” for claims under 38 C.F.R. § 1151. To establish a section 1151 claim, an additional disability must have been both actually caused, and proximately caused by qualifying treatment. One means to show proximate causation is negligence. See generally, 38 C.F.R. § 3.361(d)(1). The second way is to show that disability originated from “an event not reasonably foreseeable.” See 38 C.F.R. § 3.361(d)(2). More specifically, the Federal Circuit held that when recovery is predicated on a referral theory involving an unforeseeable event under 38 U.S.C. § 1151(a)(1)(B), 38 U.S.C. § 1151(a)(1) requires that VA medical care proximately cause the medical treatment or care during which the unforeseeable event occurred. The Court further held that 38 U.S.C. § 1151(a)(1)(B) also requires that the unforeseeable event proximately cause the additional disability. “As such, the chain of causation has two components (neither of which requires fault)-i.e., proximate cause between VA medical care and the treatment, and proximate cause between the unforeseeable event and the disability.” Ollis, 857 F.3d at 1346." ORDER Entitlement to compensation under 38 U.S.C. § 1151 for residuals of a right hip replacement is granted. FINDING OF FACT 1. The Veteran was referred to a non-VA medical provider, where he underwent a March 2008 right hip replacement. 2. The additional disability incurred as a result of the March 2008 surgery was the result of an event not reasonably foreseeable. https://www.va.gov/vetapp19/files11/19189893.txt ORDER "Entitlement to compensation under 38 U.S.C. § 1151 for any cervical and/or thoracic spine condition is granted. REMANDED Entitlement to an initial rating in excess of 40 percent for lumbar disc disease with history of laminectomy (low back disorder) from October 8, 2004, (exclusive of the period in 2009 when a temporary total evaluation was assigned pursuant to 38 C.F.R. § 4.30) is remanded. Entitlement to an extension of a temporary total rating for convalescence pursuant to 38 C.F.R. § 4.30 beyond October 31, 2009, is remanded. Entitlement to a finding of total disability based on individual unemployability due to service-connected disabilities (TDIU) prior to November 1, 2009, is remanded. FINDINGS OF FACT 1. The Veteran was referred to a non-VA medical provider, where he underwent a total disc arthroplasty at L4-5 and L5-S1 on May 5, 2009. 2. The additional disability incurred as a result of the May 2009 surgery and was the result of an event not reasonably foreseeable." https://www.va.gov/vetapp21/files4/21022558.txt To establish a section 1151 claim, an additional disability must have been both actually caused, and proximately caused by qualifying treatment. One means to show proximate causation is negligence. See generally, 38 C.F.R. § 3.361(d)(1). The second way is to show that disability originated from “an event not reasonably foreseeable.” See 38 C.F.R. § 3.361(d)(2). More specifically, the Federal Circuit held that when recovery is predicated on a referral theory involving an unforeseeable event under 38 U.S.C. § 1151(a)(1)(B), 38 U.S.C. § 1151(a)(1) requires that VA medical care proximately cause the medical treatment or care during which the unforeseeable event occurred. The Court further held that 38 U.S.C. § 1151(a)(1)(B) also requires that the unforeseeable event proximately cause the additional disability. “As such, the chain of causation has two components (neither of which requires fault)-i.e., proximate cause between VA medical care and the treatment, and proximate cause between the unforeseeable event and the disability.” Ollis, 857 F.3d at 1346. In this case, the November 2002 VA examining physician at the Phoenix, Arizona VA Medical Center (VAMC) requested that the Veteran have an EMG test conducted and he was referred by VA on a fee basis to a private physician who performed the procedure. A November 2002 VA examination indicates that the examiner recommended that he have “an electromyelogram of the left upper extremity and, if possible, the area of the symptoms.” Moreover, the November 2002 report documenting the results of the subject EMG states that the “referring physician” is “VAMC/Ratings,” and a December 2003 letter by the physician who performed the EMG procedure stated, “…I test ratings patients for the VA only. I do not treat or render final[] diagnoses.” Based on the foregoing, the Board finds that the subject November 2002 EMG test was proximately due to the November 2002 VA examiner’s request. Accordingly, the remaining questions are whether there is an additional disability, as claimed by the Veteran, and whether any such disability was proximately caused by an unforeseeable event associated with the November 2002 EMG test." https://www.va.gov/vetapp19/files6/19144618.txt I am so glad that you brought up this subject. I dint think we ever addressed it here in decades and to find that the Ollis Fed Cir decisions changed everything was quite a shock to me. It seems evidence that since Ollis, if the VA recommends any non VA treatment or surgery, that is found to have caused additional disability to the veteran ( that is a ratable condition) they would have to apply the criteria of Ollis Fed Cir to the claim!!!!!!!!!! Now I wonder what happened to legitimate 1151ers who were denied in the past but who now would fall under Ollis.....? Since there is notime limit on filing 1151 claims, would they ever find out if they should refile ,citing the Ollis decision? I will check for any DIC claims under Ollis. Do you have a personal situation which this could regard?
    1 point
  40. Thank you for that Important info- Here in NY the Stay at home started on March 26th 2020 I believe , and is starting to lift but then again there are many unvaccinated people in my county-still getting COVID, per County Health web site ( only 43% who should, have been vaccinated)and I am sure that the local Vet reps had a hard time even filing claims because of the virus. Many of us could not get an appointment until March and April 2021 to get the vaccine. Us seniors found it stressful to even go to a food market and my two annual DR. appointment were changed. I wish I knew this info sooner----thank you very much.
    1 point
  41. What I know is that if you are scheduled for a C&P exam go! If you are not scheduled for an exam no worries. It is unusual not to be scheduled for an increase without an exam especially for a mental disorder like PTSD.
    1 point
  42. There are only 10 BVA decisions since 1992 that involve 1151 and Community Care. I have not read them all but they can be read in this BVA search feature: https://www.index.va.gov/search/va/bva_search.jsp?QT=1151&EW=community+care&AT=&ET=&RPP=10&DB=2021&DB=2020&DB=2019&DB=2018&DB=2017&DB=2016&DB=2015&DB=2014&DB=2013&DB=2012&DB=2011&DB=2010&DB=2009&DB=2008&DB=2007&DB=2006&DB=2005&DB=2004&DB=2003&DB=2002&DB=2001&DB=2000&DB=1999&DB=1998&DB=1997&DB=1996&DB=1995&DB=1994&DB=1993&DB=19 https://www.va.gov/vetapp20/files11/20074122.txt https://www.va.gov/vetapp20/files6/20037247.txt In part this above link states: "Initially, the Board notes that it appears the four procedures that form the basis of the Veteran’s claim were furnished under a contract made under 38 U.S.C. § 1703, relating to the Veterans Community Care Program; therefore, the procedures cannot constitute “hospital care, medical or surgical treatment, or examination furnished to the claimant under any law administered by the Secretary, either by a Department employee or in a Department facility” for the purpose of an 1151 claim despite the source of payment for such care. See 38 C.F.R. § 3.361(f). Nevertheless, this does not prohibit the Veteran from establishing entitlement to the benefit sought on the basis of a “referral theory,” but this type of theory significantly changes the focus of the analysis of the Veteran’s claim when compared with the opinions that have been previously obtained in the context of this appeal. See Ollis v. Shulkin, 857 F.3d 1338 (Fed. Cir. 2017). In Ollis v. Shulkin, the Federal Circuit examined the applicability of section 1151 to referral situations. The Federal Circuit first acknowledged a referral theory could be based on negligence under 38 U.S.C. § 1151(a)(1)(A), e.g., VA was negligent in recommending a certain procedure, but it also noted the possibility that benefits could be granted under a referral theory pursuant to 38 U.S.C. § 1151(a)(1)(B) without any fault on VA’s part when any additional disability results from an unforeseeable event. The Federal Circuit noted the proximate cause requirement for a negligence theory under 38 U.S.C. § 1151(a)(1)(A) incorporates traditional tort law notions of proximate cause (“[a] cause that is legally sufficient to result in liability”), but it explained the causation chain for claims based on an unforeseeable event has two components (neither of which requires fault)-i.e., proximate cause between VA medical care and the treatment, and proximate cause between the unforeseeable event and the disability. Ollis, 857 F.3d at 1346." As I understand Section 1151 or 38 USC and this assessment based ,on Ollis V Shulkin, there is only 1151 potential only on an "unforseeable event" arising from a VA referral, that directly caused an additional ratable disability ( or death) to the veteran. I will add more info here if I find it.
    1 point
  43. Because of covid the date of claim is either the date it was uploaded by your VSO, the postmark on the envelope that you mailed, or, in absence of an identifiable postmark the date is 20FEB2020 until the President ends the covid national emergency. Google VA letter 20-02. There is also a separate guidance letter about granting extensions, link below. https://www.federalregister.gov/documents/2020/08/27/2020-18839/disruption-of-mail-service (Federal Register version of VA Letter 20-02 regarding postmark acceptance) https://docs.google.com/viewer?url=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.veteranslawblog.org%2Fwp-content%2Fuploads%2F2020%2F09%2FCOVID-Extensions.pdf (guidance letter about extensions) You can file a claim with no evidence and send in stuff as you go up to the decision date- every time you upload something it triggers the claim to get re-routed to someone to look at.
    1 point
  44. No, but if you submit your claim its dated either by the postmark, or 29FEB2020, and you can still add evidence to it throughout. (VA Letter 20-02) It's better to file and add evidence rather than sit on an intent to file date anyway, especially due to this letter (above). You can submit a claim without even having evidence to submit if you file a Fully Developed Claim (meaning that you provide all the info up front, 21-4142/4142a so we can get private records, etc). We search federal databases for STRs and personnel records and VAMC anyway, so if all your evidence was contained in there- you have a fully developed claim. If you have private treatment then the 21-4142/4142a is where you note those providers and give us permission to get those records. If we have to send you the forms later to request that information you d claim is no longer "Fully Developed" but it doesn't really change how your claim is handled, other than potentially speed. If you submit a claim for benefits that isn't FDC the same rules apply, so you see, there isn't really any difference and right not there isn't really a reason to do an Intent to File when you can just file the claim anyway and build it as you go. Per the above letter you can ask for extensions for providing evidence and responses to VA letters, also. I see them all the time and have for the last year +.
    1 point
  45. https://benefits.va.gov/benefits/derivative_sc.asp
    1 point
  46. Congratulations, You are P and T! You should be able to print a letter granting access to the commissary and base exchange. This is the way VA "says it".. When you get DEA, Chapter 35, it means you are P and T. Be sure to check out the other benefits, especially those in your state. Get the free life insurance, if you have not already, also.
    1 point
  47. Va "has discretion" whether or not to order an exam. There are at least 2 circumstances when no exam is needed (probably more): 1. There is already sufficient evidence in the file to award: There is a diagnosis (PTSD), a stressor included in the records, and a nexus (link between the in service stressor and current PTSD diagnosis. In this case, you are good to go. 2. There is insufficient evidence, but a c and p exam wont make a difference. Some examples are there is no stressor in the file, or the Veteran does not qualify for benefits as he does not have the requisite discharge. To determine which of these categories you are in, would require a review of your cfile. You can do this, simply check to see if you have the Caluza elements. (and, symptoms documented also).
    1 point
  48. Best evidence you can obtain is a vocational rehab opinion. You can get this through Vocational Rehab which is free. If you are truly IU then they will not accept you into the program. If not accepted ask for a Feasiblity Letter stating such.
    1 point
  49. It says you are missing "Caluza element number 2"...an "in service event or aggravation", and, Caluza element 3, Nexus. In a nutshell, you need to appeal to the BVA, like about 80% or so of the other Vets who were denied and have to appeal. You "may" need an IMO/IME with clearer nexus which would point to the in service event. Welcome to the VA hamster wheel of delays, denials, lowball, and hornswaggling the effective date. You have to keep fighting.
    1 point
×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

{terms] and Guidelines