Chuck75

Yes, but it took two passes, one via "call/email bob" and one appeal hearing. Each was a five figure amount. PTSD was not involved, but Nehmer conditions and secondaries were. It seems that the VA likes to put blinders on, and ignore things, unless kicked around!

Congratulations! The retro should be a goodly chunk of change! I can hear the VA cry about the amount!

There is another way to get evidence that may help. The VA has a training program, http://www.benefits.va.gov/vocrehab/ The VA "VRC" can write a document that the VA honors. Since SMC "S" is also involved, things may be a bit sticky. But, if the VRC says that you are not employable, and not likely to ever be so, then that's more ammunition for the P&T. The PTSD and no P&T seems to be a VA practice these days. The VA "only" PTSD diagnosis is something that the VA pushed, and is counter to all the other conditions and VA/court recognized diagnosis. After all, if a "QTC" doctor can diagnose PTSD, then any qualified by specialty doctor should be able to do so. It's rather obvious to me that this was an effort to contain costs, to the detriment of veterans. What I really don't care for is the VA's penchant to decide that a high percentage PTSD veteran should be in the VA's Fiduciary program.

That would be just yesterday to the last VA C&P examiner I was sent to. He appeared to at least be in his 80's, and less than computer literate. So much so that I ended up mentioning it to the VAMC's C&P division head.

"I wonder if the C & P docs are actually using the new TBI rules" That might depend on how long it takes the VA to update the computerized C&P software, and the examiners use of it.

Herein lies a conundrum. PTSD is categorized as a mental/psychological condition, and TBI is a physical condition resulting from an injury/event. The VA basically considers mental and physical conditions differently, except when they can use a "pyramiding" excuse to avoid one or the other. In general, it's better to have a rating for a physical condition than a mental one if one or the other is a choice. The obvious exception would be a large difference in the rating percentage between the two. I'm sure that the newness of TBI as a recognized SC condition is causing a lot of inconsistency in the way the VA rates.

If you are rated for PTSD, or other "mental conditions", the VA "person" is incorrect. (Unless there is a change that no one knows about!) Otherwise, a 100% "Statutory" rating allows work. A 100% TDIU does not, but there can be narrow exceptions. Not P&T is not an issue at present. But, in a C&P exam, if employment comes up, it may or may not influence the examiner. As an aside - - - Not too long ago, I had a member of the VA executive staff try to tell me that the maximum VA rating was 100%. That lasted all of about 5 seconds, when I mentioned SMC and housebound. The reply was "oh". ????

If you file an NOD on time, Retro should go back to the date of the claim. If you had requested 100%, and was rated at 70%, you still have cause to disagree with another NOD. If I understand you post, the date looks like Feb 24, 2014. I'd add the evidence to the NOD as new and pertinent It might depend a bit on what the previous evidence was. If it was sufficient for a 100% TDIU rating or not. (Regardless of the 70% award, since it might be a "low ball" rating) You should also be aware that high percentage PTSD awards can result in a VA proposal to appoint a fiduciary. (You really want to avoid that!)

Evidently the carrier was in the Vietnam area in the periods below. APR 1966 - OCT 1966 West Pac-Viet Nam MAY 1967 - DEC 1967 West Pac-Viet Nam JUN 1967 - DEC 1967 West Pac-Viet Nam JAN 1968 - FEB 1969 West Pac-Viet Nam Beyond that, IHD is an A.O. presumptive for Brown Water and Feet on Ground Sailors.. I'd suggest that you look at http://www.bluewaternavy.org/ and the VA Brown water list The problem will be to show plausible exposure. Are any Navy personnel records of service in your dad's possession? Did your dad ever go ashore in Vietnam? Did he fly out or in via an airbase in Vietnam for any reason? Where and when did your dad go through a transit base (if any) before reporting aboard the carrier. What herbicides did the government say he was exposed to?

I had not read the last post you refer to. That said, my remarks were made as a general statement, in order to possibly help someone reading this thread.

There is this - - - The VA has the ability to look at and obtain SSA records. Naturally, since it may take a bit of effort, there is no assurance that they will do so, unless prompted by events. Even when SSDI is awarded for conditions that are or potentially are service connected, a contrary RO may decide otherwise, and force an NOD, etc. At least the BVA and court will generally see SSDI as positive evidence.

The way I see it - - - Much of the law and regulation in statute and practice is deliberately made in ways that favor the government and the bureaucrats. Time is one of the things that generally favors the government. Records are no longer available, due to government disposal practices, etc. In particular, veterans and claims have been hard hit, simply because the evidence requirements involve records that the government often has or had control over. A more recent example has to do with various Mid east related claims, and the simple fact that a significant amount of records were disposed of rather than pay for transport back to the US and filing. When I started with my claim over a decade ago, I was appalled to find that the government had permitted hospitals to basically dispose of or make unavailable medical records that were over a certain age. This really impacted my ability to show continuity of certain conditions that started in service. Even employers that had kept medical records of in house treatment, and insurance companies seemed to have been allowed to dispose of records that can be critical. (Unless the records favor the employer or insurance company, then they seem to magically reappear when needed.) A non medical records issue I currently have is that the only copy of my discharge (Separate from a DD214) I have is not the original. I have been unsuccessful in obtaining a certified copy. The problem is based upon the government itself, in that decades ago, I was required to furnish the original to a government agency that was never returned as it should have been. Never-mind that the original is a matter of public record and was entered into county records decades ago. (The log entry exists, but there is no copy of the original or detail beyond the date, service, and honorable. ) Seems the state took over the records some time ago. The "digitization" of records by the VA and others really scares me. The original record's details can easily be lost or altered due to multiple causes.

The services do this so that they can evade paying. As to your chances of getting things changed, I just have no knowledge. Your issue is similar to one that happened to me many decades ago. The examining separation doctor gave me a choice of honorable separation that my orders called for or getting stuck in what I would term a "mickey mouse" med hold status until the base hospital got around to running a dangerous medical test to verify the problem. I figured that I'd rather have such a test done on the outside for obvious reasons. Earlier, a Navy hospital had refused to do the test as part of other treatment, even though it would have been easy to do, although perhaps just as dangerous. On the civilian side, the decision tree was constant pain, do the test. If not, don't, and treat the transient pain. In any event any related surgery had and has only a 50% chance of a fully favorable outcome.

The problems in this state would be Hang up any driver's license Forget any concealed carry permit The usual illicit drug possession charges (And so on)

A reference for you to read. It's likely that you will have to get an outside VA board certified cardiologist to write an opinion (IMO). http://www.emedicinehealth.com/supraventricular_tachycardia/page2_em.htm Ablation is one way of trying to control the problem. A VA RO and C&P examiner may try to use any non covered alternative causes as an excuse to deny without a good authoritative IMO. It may go even further, in that the VA schedules a C&P by a VA examiner that has little business doing a C&P for this particular condition.

Then SSDI is obviously "over the dam!" My remark was pointed towards an earlier message in the thread. As to when to start collecting SS - - If you think that you will live to a ripe old age, putting off actual payment until ~70 can increase the payment by about 30%. Us with serious VA SC'd disabilities have to carefully consider the impact of the disabilities on our life expectancy before using this alternative.

Depending on your age - - If you are collecting SS at a lower rate due to early retirement, 62, etc. Then SSDI can change the amount to that you would have received based upon full retirement age. When you hit full retirement age, the SSDI changes to SS automatically.

The clinic PCP has to say in the VA computer system that you are eligible. Somehow, this gets to the Choice program as initial authorization. This may mean that you have to get an appointment to get access to the PCP to get the process started. (More Delay) The qualifying reasons were two. Distance from the VA facility able to provide the service (Difficulty is a sub category of this one). OR delay over 31 days to get an appointment. (The 31 day bit can be interpreted as time to an appointment to get a referral appointment to the whatever that can provide the service) In 2014, it took me a bit more than six months to get the fee paid process to authorize a cardiac cath. Going directly to the cardiologist, and having Medicare Advantage pay - a few days, No more than two days or even less if I started having certain symptoms. The VA option was used because it was much less expense to me, and, having lived with a serious heart condition for decades, I can recognize various get something done now symptoms. In the past, I often did not have the luxury, either due to the VA's snail pace, or emerging symptoms that required immediate attention. The PCP is the one that says that the clinic cannot provide the needed services. In my area, the changes have totally screwed up the old fee paid scheme that was the process before "Choice".

Looks to me like another means to spend money on things other than veterans and direct medical care costs. Gotta keep the paper pushers busy watching other paper pushers!

E Bennies is often wrong., out of date, and has reliability problems. It can be of some use, or very frustrating.

A PHD is A PHD, and a doctorate in medicine is just the start. Anyway. another factor is the reputability of the institution, medical or otherwise. A specialist's opinion on a recognized institutional letterhead is often given more consideration than one with the specialist's personal letterhead.

The key is that the Clinic cannot or does not provide the needed services. The clinic PCP then can start the Choice eligibility process if they cannot provide the services needed within the time limit. You have to get the PCP to do this with or without an appointment. (E Bennies email, talk to the PCP's "nurse", etc.)

The problems with C&P exams are usually when the C&P contributes to a denial, not an approval. Too many examiners seem to have a bias. Or, try to shade the results in ways that favor lower ratings or cast doubt on the possible service connection.

A serious problem arises when the BVA hearing officer does not have and has not reviewed the records. This happened to me about this time last year. To add injury, the hearing location was at the VARO that supposedly had custody of the records.

And who (silly you) thinks that the VA would use a method more favorable to veterans unless forced by law and regulation to do so?