Mil T

I was wondering if anyone knows the legal time requirement for the VA in notifying a person for a C&P exam. I thought I read somewhere it was 14 days.

Thanks Berta. This BVA case does help. I'll be damned if I can find a DBQ form that addresses any STS in it. This is considered an gastrointestinal illness but there is nothing under the Gastro DBQ's that I see addresses any sts. I could have sworn I have seen other DBQ's that address cancers caused by toxins. I wish the VA had DBQ's for the presumptive illnesses that the VA has established for all presumptive illnesses, be it Gulf War, Vietnam etc. Thanks again for your help. Mil

I need to get the DBQ form to have the doctor fill out for an AO presumptive Soft Tissue Sarcoma (GIST) claim but I can't figure out which one to use. Can someone guide me to the right form please.

Take the advice of the audiologist and go seek mental health care. In her report she is describing symptoms that are related to PTSD, Dementia, and Adult ADD. patient experiences difficulty listening and staying focused. - hard to listen to radio from the right ear. - didn't do well in school becaues too hard to read and focus on lectures. - noisy environments give patient a headache - poor memory, forgetful, patient had SLP consult but declined to continue therapy - loses focus easily so difficult to follow instructions - also reports high levels of stress and insomnia, both of which have been documented in other reports - SLP therapy and sleep study have been postponed because patient is unwilling or unable to change behavoir (i.e. use smartphone and sleep without guns) You have other issues besides audio which can cause thinking that you are not hearing correctly. I do not understand the audio report by your Dr. It does not look like any I have seen that the VA health care is supposed to report per 38 usc. Speech Recognition should be 94% and below for recognized hearing loss Frequency tone patterns should be decibel loss of 24% and above for recognized hearing loss. Your report has; Frequency Tone Patterns (normal = 75%) AU @ 60 dBHL: 32% Compressed Word Recognition Test (normal = 72%): This is not a normal VA way or reporting per 38 USC. Per these numbers, she reported, both should qualify you for hearing loss and both in the SEVERE or PROFOUND LOSS column. What VA Medical Center did you go to? Something just is not right here.

Thanks Vern and Navy04. I will look at what he can apply for. His PTSD and counseling has him with a GAF of 45. He has 5 tours which with everything else and the Stress letters should get him a 70% first time out for PTSD. I'm not sure we want to go that way yet until he actually gets out. I'll look at Hearing and tinnitus etc. that usually doesn't get more than a 20% and Tinitus at 10%. The VA will have a hard time disputing that he has a hearing issue that started in the service. That is why I'm suggesting to him to get in and complain and document everything and anything. It should make our job easier to prove and success in awards. He really needs to be at 100% because of his PTSD. He cannot really work at this point but has to too make ends meet with his family. Thanks again. Mil T

Hello. I think I know the answer but I want to run this by some of the experts on here. I have a brother that is in the Army Reserves and will be getting out in March of 2015. He was Active Army from 2001 to 2005. 11B Infantry. 1 tour Iraq. 1 tour Afg. He ets'd active May 2005. Reuped Oct. 2006 Army Reserve as MP combat support. Called to active duty Aug 2007 to May 2008 Iraq. July 2010 to Aug 2011 Iraq. June 2013 to March 2014 Afg. 5 tours total in 13 years. He would like to file a claim for PTSD. He has been going to vet center for counseling for couple of years now accept for his deployments. We were talking and I told him that I didn't think he could file with VA yet but that he needs to ask for counseling through the reserves to establish a med record along with any other things that he would want to file for like hearing, tinnitus, injuries etc. so that it is easier when he does get out. The main question is; can he apply for VA benefits while he is still active reserve? Can he file a claim while still on active reserves? Thanks. Mil T

Manning01. I am an unofficial VSO in Payson. I am the only person helping Vets up here. I do it voluntarily by word of mouth. My case load is approx. 20 cases at any time. I need to find a good VSO that I can send Vets to. Can you give me tteh VSO at AMVETS that you have used. It has been difficult to find a GOOD vso to refer to. Thanks Mil T

Hoppy. Thanks for the offer of assistance. I will take you up on that as I will be trying to do the right steps to try and stop the VA from sending it off to never never land. I have a lot of back up in the vets files with diagnosis etc. from the Air Force shrink so that may help. The vet also started seeing mental health specialists here in our small town not long after he was discharged. I will get those records and see what they say. I'm still wondering though if I should have all my bases covered with amending the claim to add the Dysthemic Disorder since that is what the Air Force actually diagnosed. This might be the perverbial monkey wrench that could sidetrack the claim if I dont' put it on there. Mil T

Hello All. I am working with a young man that was discharged from Air Force in 2006 after 3+ years of service. His records show that he was diagnosed with Dysthymic Disorder and that he was discharged for Personality Disorder. Dr. report claims the Dysthymic Disorder was pre-existing. I reviewed his entry physicals and there is nothing there for mental illness so that is bogus. He has since been diagnosed Paranoid Schitzophrinic for which we filed VA claim for. I've read his files and it shows an above average to exemplory performance up until 2005 when it all went backwards. He has been seen in our town by mental health facility and documentation has been forwarded to VA as evidence. My question is wether or not we should submit an addendum to include Dysthymic Disorder along with the Para Schitz. or should the Para Schitz be secondary to the Dysthymic Disorder? I have found document study's that mention that DD is connected to and is a pre-cursor to Schitz. We have all the evidence to show this started in the service so I'm confident he will be SC. My goal is to achieve 100% for him since he has been deemed incompetent by the Social Security Admin already. Ironically his mother 54 was also diagnosed while she served back in 1978. She was also discharged. She was also Sexually Assaulted. I talked her into filing as well. She had been told back then by family that she should keep her mouth shut and move on. I am treading new waters her but evidence is overwelming that I cannot see how the VA can deny a claim. I've put her in for the Schitz and PTSD. Thanks Mil T

I'm wondering if anyone has handled a claim or have filed a claim for Multiple Myeloma when they have been diagnosed with Monoclonal gammopathy of undetermined significance, or MGUS. This can be a precurser to MM. MGUS is not MM but doctors have to continue to monitor for MM if you have MGUS. Does anyone have experience with the VA and MGUS? Thanks, Mil T

I received my T&P IU April 5. I filed an application for my Wife to receive ChampVa benefits a couple days later by mail. On April 23 I had to take my wife to ER for what she thought was a heart attack. It turned out to not be but I was wondering if this visit could be paid by Champva retroactively if she qualifies and is accepted into the Champva program. Does the elgibility start when I received the 100% T&P award or when her application is approved? Mil T

There are only 2 hardships per the VA. 1. Financial which usually is for bankruptcy or forclosure. 2. life or death. I have filed both types for a couple of vets. The financial is not as fast but does get a little more attention and moves a little quicker but you need to actually have court paperwork showing either the Bankruptcy or forclosure. On the Life or Death, they made a decision in 2 weeks. Although it was a denial because the Doctor did not use the right wording for the leukemia this person has. We have the Doctor writing the correct wording on his condition. He has been given 6 months to live so they are expediting. It is so important to make sure that the doctors you use that diagnose SC conditions such as for Agent Orange presumptive illnesses use the correct words when sending in their letters or DBQ's. It must say either "Morel likely than not" or "As likely as not" or the examiners will kick it back denied. Good luck. Mil T

we looked in VA letters in the E-Benefits and a letter saying he is Total and Permanent is there for his use. We are submitting the Champva paperwork along with other forms for benefits befitting a 100%ter that is T&P. Mil

Hi. I have a vet that received his decision letter in his claim for IU. He was succesful for getting IU. It does not say anything about P&T in the body of the letter accept for this one place. Under reasons for decisions #2 Eligibility to Dependents' Educational Assistance Under 38 USC Chapter 35, the last sentence states: "Basic eligbility to Dependent's Education Assistance is granted as the evidence shows you currently have a total service-connected disability, permanent in nature. Does this mean that he is actually P&T? Should he use this letter as verification for P&T when he submits for Champva for his spouse and the other benefits for P&T that come with it? Thanks, Mil

Getting back to this issue. I've been busy with lots of decisions coming in all of a sudden by others I have been working with. What I have done with this particular vet is to study his documents and the evidence that was turned in. It was clear that they missed some very important evidence that was turned in June of 2010 that was crucial in a favorable decision. Also the fact that he has never had a c&p for any of the claimed disabilities and they used doctor exams with diagnosis etc. dating back to 2008 to make the decision. That is what I find so frustrating. This was a de novo review done by a DRO on each SOC. Anyway, we have asked for an informal DRO hearing and not a de-novo review. We will resubmit the evidence that they left off the list that they used for evidence. We will submit the 4 psyc reports that state his PTSD is from combat related stressors. We'll see what happens. Thanks for your help guys. Mil T

Thanks Bob for your feedback. I have the VA form 9 for each of the SOC's that the vet has received. I have all of his information that he has collected. Basically he has trusted me with all of this as he is fighting his health issues. I told him to get himself healed and I will handle the claim. I am also his listed representative at this point. I wish we had some trained VSO's here. I am the only game in a town of 20K people. There have been other informal advocates that have helped but have become so overwelmed (we have a lot of Veterans here) that they faded away. I get an average of at least one new case a week. I have been handling on average 25 Veterans claims at one time. I know that doesn't sound like much compared to a regular VSO that works for an Organization but it's a lot when you are not being paid or supported in any way. I do it because as a veteran myself, I respect, and honor those that spent the time to be in the service and that have been in the various evils of war. I was a combat Vet in the 101st Ariborne in Vietnam. I have handled my own claims for compensation succesfully and have also handled several other succesful claims for others. It's these crazy ones that don't make any since as to why they have been denied or that there are CUE's written all over them that are so frustrating. I plan on scanning and posting this Veterans SOC's here so everyone can see them and help advise. We have until May 28 to meet the 60 days so I am taking my time and getting advise here as to what would be the best direction and possibly shortest avenue to move forward. I do meet with a Veterans Representative at the RO in Phoenix regularly. He also has a difficult time in understanding some of the decisions that are made. He has helped me in advising direction to go etc. on some but I am starting to think he gives me boiler plate type advise most of the time. Thanks again for your interest in this Vets case. Mil T

I thank everyone for the feedback. I am still not sure what direction to go yet for this Vet. There is more information to get for the proof of stressor and I can understand that. I want to clear one thing up though. He was not with an infantry division. He was a chinook helicoptor crew chief on a medivac chinook. When he was at Cu Chi he was with a transportation unit that used chinooks. Everyone pulled guard duty and being he was an E5 he was an NCOIC on that bunker. Unfortunatly the Vet has gone back into the hospital with severe COPD. I am worried for him at this time. After I posted here for this thread, This Vet received another packet in the mail with a SOC dening the other claimed disibility's. Hearing, Tinnitus, increase in Migranes. I dont' have time right now to spend going over the whole thing but what has struck me odd in this one is that they have refered back to 2008 C&P's in the migranes claim. Since 2008 this Vet had to stop work. I remember that he stopped work just before I met him and started helping him which was June of 2010. We turned in a report from his employer, of all of the time he missed due to his dibilitating migranes which he is 30% rated for due to them starting in the service and they were recorded as such in his records. He turned in documentation of his missed employement along with other documentation from the VA doctor stating this Vet cannot work because of the headaches yet the SOC says they could not increase because there was no evidence suggesting that the Vet had gotten worse. No new C&P's again just like the PTSD desision. My thoughts at this time is to turn in an NOD for all of these citing the lack of C&P's. Using old C&P's for rating decisions. Not considering the evidence of 3 different VA Mental Health Dept's opinions and treatment saying that his PTSD is combat related and other criteria that seems to have been overlooked when the decisions were made. I will ask for a hearing and not a De-NOVO. I will research archives to see what I can find using the information you guys have forwarded to me and also Websites of the units this Vet was in. This seems to be a direction that makes since as I don't want to think about a BVA appeal as I'm not sure this vet can wait that long with the way his health is deteriorated so quickly. Thanks again for the great feedback. This website really helps us informal Vet Advocates that are the only game in town when you live in a small community like ours. Mil T

Thanks. I wasn't sure on that one but it was the closest to Lung Cancer that I could find. Mil T

Hello. I was wondering if anyone knows which DBQ form is used for lung cancer? Thanks. Mil T

Veteran received letter of decision per a notice of disagreement filed 01-19-10 for denied PTSD. Includes Statement of Case. De Novo review was completed 03-28-12. Veteran submitted 2 Stressor incident Letters pertaining to enemy fire. Also helped load and witnessed dead American bodies while aboard helicoptor. while medivac helicoptor crew chief took direct fire from small arms. Other stressful incident was, while on bunker duty on initial Tet of 1968 attack in Cu Chi received opening volly of direct mortor attack on his bunker location. Very clear concise testimony naming dates, times other individuals involved, units assigned, etc. Veteran has been involved with PTSD counseling since 2009. Diagnosed PTSD due to combat by several VA mental health doctors. Has attended 27 day inpatient EBTPU (Evaluation and Brief Treatment for PTSD Unit) program at Tucson VA Med Cntr in Oct 2011. He was admitted for 5 day inpatient for mental stress related to PTSD at Phoenix Med Cntr in 2010. He has been attending individual and group counceling at Prescott Med cntr, Mental Health Dept. for last 2 years. He is in group counceling in Payson, Az. administered by Mesa Az. Vet Cntr for the past 5 yrs. All of the records of each of these facilities and doctors acknowledge his PTSD as Combat Related in writing. His DD214 show Air Medals as part of the Vietnam service awards. His MOS was 67U20 MTR HEL Mech. Actual duty was NCOIS, Crew Chief on C47 Chinook Helicopter. He is service connected 30% for Migrane headaches that started while he was in service and in Vietnam. The claim for PTSD has been on the books since April 2008. Denied March 2009 for lack of evidence. June 4 2009 submitted NOD. The VA said that he retracted request for appeal (which Vet says he never did) So they say he resubmitted January 2010. The Veteran has never been called in for C&P exam for PTSD ever. Here is the final conclusion statement of Statement of Claim: In the absence of objective evidence showing your claimed post traumatic stress disorder was treated during your active military service or objective evidence showing a relationship to your active military service, nor is there evidence to corroborate a military-related stressful event actually occurred, service connection cannot be granted. Am I missing something here? NO ONE seeked help while in service for PTSD. It didn't exist then. And if somone complained about it, they were shoved out the door and sent back to the field or back to where ever you were assigned. I have looked at the 38 regs that accompany the SOC. I believe they failed in seveal areas. The most being; 38USC3.159 Assistance in developing claim. (4) Providing medical examination or obtaining medical opinions. 3.304(d) Direct service connection: Wartime and peacetime (Combat) 3.304(f) 1. Direct service connection: Wartime and peacetime; Post Traumatic Stress Disorder. Both of these state, ' The Veteran's lay testimony alone may establish the occurrence of the claimed in-service stressor'. 3.304(f) 3. Veterans fear of hostile military or terrorist activity, -- for purposes of this paragraph, "fear of hostile miltiary or terrorist activity means that a veteran experienced, witnessed or was confronted with an event or circumstance that involved actual or threatened death or serious injury or a threat to the physical intergrity of the veteran or others, such as from an actual or potential improvised explosive device; vehicle embedded explosive device; incoming artillery, rocket or mortar fire; grenade; small arms fire. including suspected sniper fire, or attack upon friendly military aricraft, and the veterans' response to the event or circumstance involved a psychological or psycho-physiological state of fear, helplessness or horror. In all of these it is clearly stated; " that the Veterans lay testimony alone may establish the occurrence of the claimed in-service stressor." So why is do they say OBJECTIVE evidence and if they wanted that then they had an obligation to help get the day journals of the incidents. He gave them enough information to do that. And if they couldn't get it then they should not be writing that it needed to be presented by the Veteran. I just don't understand why the VA keeps going back on the idea that what is in or is NOT in your military file is enough to deny claims. PTSD wasn't even a diagnosis yet from Vietnam and yet these decision makers keep refering to it that there was no diagnosis of it in medical records. I'm trying to figure out what the next step is. If it goes to the BVA this Vet, who is very ill may not ever see anything from his efforts. My thoughts are to wrtie a letter back to the RO with a reconsideration based on the information and more that I wrote here. Carlie, Berta, Anyone with helpful suggestions will be appreciated. Mil T

I'm interested in what Meds were causeing GERD. I have Gerd but never knew it could be due to meds. I was successful with ED due to meds. If meds can cause GERD then I wonder if I could also claim my esophogas stricture ring that develops every 5 years or so. It's called a shotsky's ring and is caused by the acid reflux or GERD. Mil T

I went to Phoenix RO today to discuss this Veterans case with the same rep I have always talked to and that knows this Veterans case completely. He told me that he went up with the file after we left our meeting with him last Tuesday. He talked with the Appeals dept at the RO and they were the ones that advised that the word remand could not be used by the Veteran. But that what they were reading into it was that the Vet wanted his claim retracted from appeals and that would close the claims and a new one would be started with the new evidence which would stop the original dates of the claims in appeal and the new claims would start new dates. That made since to me so now I understand how that can happen. The VA rep advised them that this was not the original intent and that all we were trying to do is to have a re-evaluation of the evidence for the claims with the new evidence. So the appeals person is the one that called the Vet and let him know this and that they would not send it back or close the appeals claims and that they would continue it in appeals. They were protecting the Vets original dates of claims which we do appreciate. So that was cleared up. The other part is that the claims have not been sent to the BVA. They are still in the appeals dept. of the RO. Now that confused me because I was of the understanding that there is only one appeals dept. Apparently not and I was made clear of that today. It's like there are 2 depts. The RO appeals process which is triggered by the NOD and DRO's and review of new evidence etc. Then a decision is completed one way or the other in the RO appeals dept. When a decision is made and If you disagree with that decision then you have the right to send it to the BVA where the docket # etc. is established and the long process starts of appeal in the Washington arena of the BVA. So right now his files are in Phoenix RO. There is no Docket # and all is being handled in Phoenix. Whoever called from Minnesota named Cheryl does not show up on the Vets online file so whoever called and gave all the confusing information and saying it was being handled through the Washington Appeals Management cntr just totally confused the Vet with bad information. We are in good shape for now and will continue with waiting and monitoring. The attorney is not representative of record. I am, with the origional 21-22A form that was filled out the same time he fired the attorney. Now here's the kicker. While I was waiting to see the va rep to discuss this issue, I got a phone call from the Veteran. He was at an Ortho appointment in Prescott VA med cntr that was set up by his VA GP for his knees. The Vet has been told that he was a candidate for knee replacement for his 0% SC knees which is why he was discharged for in 1972 from the Navy. Documented by VA doctors that his knees suffer from severe deg arth. The Vet carried all the other doctor's C&P exam notes and other progress notes and diagnosis to this ortho doctor for the appointment. This doctor told the Vet that the problem with his knees was caused by his Parkinson's. The Vet had to call me to tell me he almost blew it. He could not believe what this doctor had just told him and then excused himself from the appointment telling the doctor he was nuts. I could not believe what he told me. I'm telling you that if this vet didn't have bad luck he wouldn't have any luck at all, which for him may be a better alternative. I advised the Vet to talk to the Ortho Dept Head and tell him what was said and also his GP in order to get a 2nd opinion. At least I was able to set his mind at ease about his claims. and that he was not going to loose his original dates for the claims. I told the VA rep what had happened and he also was as confused and dumb founded as I was to hear what the ortho doctor said. Go figure. So with all of this dialogue, I have been educated more and I do appreciate the time you have spent with me on this. I hope that by some degree that someone else may benefit from this dialog as well Thank you Carlise for your help. Mil T.

Carlie. I do understand everything that you said in this response and agree with most with ? on some. I am taking the advise of the Veteran Service Rep that I see when I go to the RO. I always see the same one so I don't have to re-explain everything about a case to another VSR. Regarding the 22A form. That is what I did at first. When I went down to check one time on this claim, I was told it was in the Sensative File section. I asked what and why it was in that. I was told that when claims are handled by attorneys that only privledged, cleared personel are allowed to handle the file. That if I wanted to ask questions or review the file that I would have to fill out a 0845 form so that as a third person I could do what I'm doing. So I did what they advised. My mistake. I did not understand why they were suggesting this as I did read and understand the 22A and saw no restrictions for a regular person to represent a Veteran with their claims. I will follow up with a 22A again and with the questions that you suggested. The word remand was always a concern of mine as well. However I was of the understanding that when N&M evidence is submitted for a claim and the claim is in appeals that it would come back to the RO anyway. My thoughts, because it has taken so long for these claims and this Vet to get any resolution that bringing it back to the RO would initiate a faster decision than an appeal. As explained to myself and the Vet by the VSR that I use at the RO that a regular claim is approx. 12-18 months, an NOD with a DRO or the appeal section of the RO usually takes 18 to 36 months and a regular BVA appeal is 36 to 10+ years. The previous attempts for these particular claims had all been denied, mainly by mishandling by Service Orgs VSO's and Attorney. I have been trying to get some since of these claims since I took over. I have a good handle so that the Vet and myself understand what has happened. The problem is never knowing, until this last visit, and that has been blown out of the water now, as to exactly where the claims are at. I will be calling the BVA OMBudsman Monday. I hope you can understand that when we get the RO service rep telling us in person to do what we have been doing and then the someone from the RO Appeals dept, calling the vet the next day with different information and then someone from Minnesota the next and giving all different information it is frustrating to say the least. Regarding the point of filing the waiver. I'm a bit confused. The waiver is for the BVA to NOT have the N&M evidence remanded back to the RO for review and a decision made if appropriate. The N&M evidence that we have turned in are doctors reports showing PTSD diagnosed, Knees worsening, Stressor letters that were never written explaining the incidents that caused PTSD while in service aboard the Enterprise. Noise trauma proof and studies by the Navy that showed the Decibals of the job this Vet did and the ultimate damage it caused. Deck records to show the incidents actually took place that were described etc. Plus on going progress reports from Doctors.that continually show lack of improvement for this veterans claimed illnesses. We also have the C&P doctor exams and each of those doctors have said he is not capable of any fullfilling activites or gainful employment due to his illnesses. Non of this had been turned in until the Veteran came to me. I found a lot of infomation in the files that the Vet had received from the Attorney when he was let go. None of this information was ever turned in. One of the other things that happened and has been a questionable practice in my opinion was that when the Veteran left St. Louis, he requested, in writing, that his case be kept there for adjudication based on the DRO hearing that had just been done. The DRO hearing officer agreed and was working the claim when his supervisor came up to him and took the file and told him that he was not to work on it any longer and that he was sending it to Phoenix. This supervisor and the vets attorney were friends and when nothing was happening and the Vet released the attorney for service, all of this happened. The Veteran talked to the DRO that heard the case and recieved this information straight from him. We requested a copy of the hearing through the Phoenix RO and we received a letter from St. Louis that said the recording machine had malfunctioned and nothing was available. Go figure. So you can see that there has been some unconventional handling of this claim. Also at that time the Vet was still being reviewed for AO presumptives which I explained before he was not qualified for and he finally dropped. I know this is a discombobulated situation. Thats the reason I am here in the first place. I have been pretty successful with many other claims etc. and representing other Veterans but his one came all messed up and has taken some time to try and get it sorted out but as you have read, it has been very difficult to get straight and accurate information from the VA. Undoing the damage that people that are supposed to be in the know have done is difficult when it's an amature trying to straighten it up. I do appreciate your help very much. Your disclaimer is pretty much the same as myself. I am not an export, or attorney or a trained VSO but I do this to help my fellow Veterans in a town that no one is available from any organization or the VA itself. To show you how messed up it can get in this town for us veterans, I have been a member of a combat vet counceling group that meets every other Thursday for 5 years. The council came from the Mesa Vet Center 100 miles away. This past Dec. the coucelor from the vet center came in to the meeting and announced the Vet Center would not be sending anyone up to do counceling any longer and that was the last meeting. Needless to say everyone was pretty much shocked and for a predomanetly Vietnam Veteran group of Grunts, it did not set to well. We have completely felt abadoned. The group has approx 23 vets that participated. The Vet Center has said they are working on a solution but so far nothing has transpired. I don't have faith that anything will happen. We continue to meet because we are all close and know each others problems and are there to help each other when necessary. We have definitly come to learn that the VA is not our advocate but our advisary just like when we came home from war.

Wording of 4138 turned into the Phoenix VARO on 10/11/2011: I would like to remand all of my claims in appeal status back to the Phoenix RO for adjudication based on the new evidence I have submitted over the past 6 months and doctor exams that were conducted for the claims. I wish to have the claims re-opened with the new evidence that I have submitted regarding PTSD, HEARING LOSS, TINNITUS, and MY SC KNEES. Second request sent 11/7/2011 with small change in wording and also sent to Phoenix VARO: I am requesting that all of my claims in appeal status be moved back to the Phoenix RO for adjudication based on the new evidence I have submitted over the past 8 months and doctor exams that were conducted for those claims. I wish to have the claims re-opened with the new evidence that I have submitted regarding PTSD, HEARING LOSS, TINNITUS, and MY SC KNEES.

I just talked with the Vet. Someone by the name of Cheryl from Minneapalis called him and gave him dates of claims and where they have been sent to at this time. HIs knees and hearing loss that was first denied in 2007 was sent to RO (I'm going to assume Phoenix) on May 7, 2011 The PTSD/Depression which was denied in May 2010 and NOD sent in May of 2010 was sent to RO Jan 2012. The IU that was denied in 2008 and also Jan 2012 is at Phoenix, and an NOD was submitted in Feb 2012. His April 2009 adaptive eq. Car Grant (attorney put this in) was denied and DRO hearing was done was sent to RO in 2011. She also told him that all the claims are at the Washington DC management of Appeals. Now mind you, yesterday he received the call from the Phoenix RO Appeals that if he remanded his appeals that he would loose his retro dates. We also viewed the file ourselves on Tuesday at the phoenix RO. So the quesion that is in my mind is why the Gal from Minneapalis is calling with this information and how could the claims be in Washington and we viewed them in Phoenix on Tuesday. Oh and the gal from Minn says that his file is in the sensative area at this time. That's because he had an attorney working it but the VA has the letter from the Vet and the attorney telling them that the attorney is no longer handling the case. It's almost like we have been sending all this information for the past year and no one ever reads it or follows up with what we tell them or ask for. Are you totally confused yet?? Mil T