Philip Rogers

I'm fairly sure "truth" is an absolute defense to slander. You were and are trying to get your compensation raised, so it's not slander. Personally I'm suspect of you but I have that right to my opinion. Me thinks you doth protest too much. Am I to understand you served active duty in the military for the 28 years you served your country and are retired military? jmo pr

Jangrin - I'm 100% sc P&T, with SSDI and Medicare. I use medicare for my private physician care. I pay the 20% co-payment of the allowed charges. I use the VA only for an occassional lab work and meds, if needed. Meds not in the VA formulary I pay out of pocket. Small price to pay for my "life." jmo pr

Jangrin - I'm going to add my 2 cents, here. Generally the VA can only do one thing at a time. Bear in mind they are "end product" oriented, meaning the file moves from the in-box to the out-box, not whether the job is done right in the moving process. A reconsideration, to me, is a complete waste of time. The reviewer generally doesn't go any further reviewing than the previous decision. They assume the previous party did everything correctly. I used the DRO system about 10 yrs ago, when it began, and made gains each time there, eventually getting TDIU, however, I also had an appeal into the BVA and won 100% schedular, back to my original claim date. BVA appeals are frequently remanded back to the RO, for further development, due to a lack of original development. This is where much of the delay happens. Actually, we are at their mercy. Hopefully this lawyer rep thing will remain but who knows. You've received some excellent advice from very knowledgable people here but the VA is the VA. The aforementioned are just my experiences and they are years old. The VA has learned from the Insurance industry to deny, deny, deny, thereby delaying, delaying, delaying payment. They know eventually many will give up and the VA wins. I believe it is intentional but then what do I know! jmo pr

That would depend. Two of my VA counselors were MSW's and since they treated PTSD, their diagnoses carried much weight. pr

Generally without stressor verification the VA will frequently deny service connection (SC) for the PTSD and rate as non-service connected (NSC). The same would go for the depression unless they you can tie the depression to a current SC condition. pr

Sixthscents - Thanks, Bob! That was my feeling but wanted to get a little more input. An "s" rating is better than none. Thanks. pr

John, you would have a choice of 2001 or 2004, whichever would be more advantagous to you. pr

If I read it right you should have had 10 yrs from the date of his death or 10 yrs from the notice, 3 yrs later. Your choice. pr

It's spelled out in 38 CFR 21.3046. pr §21.3046 Periods of eligibility; spouses and surviving spouses. This section states how VA will compute the beginning date, the ending date and the length of a spouse's or surviving spouse's period of eligibility. The period of eligibility of a spouse computed under the provisions of paragraph (a) of this section will be recomputed under the provisions of paragraph (b) of this section if her or his status changes to that of surviving spouse. (Authority: 38 U.S.C. 3512(b)) (a) Beginning date of eligibility period-spouses. (1) If the permanent total rating is effective before December 1, 1968, the beginning date of the 10-year period of eligibility is December 1, 1968. (2) The beginning date of eligibility— (i) Shall be determined as provided in paragraph (a)(2) of this section when— (A) The permanent total rating is effective after November 30, 1968, or the notification to the veteran of the rating was after that date, and (B) Eligibility does not arise under §21.3021(a)(3)(ii) of this part. (ii) For spouses for whom VA made a final determination of eligibility before October 28, 1986, shall be— (A) The effective date of the rating, or (B) The date of notification, whichever is more advantageous to the spouse. (iii) For spouses for whom VA made a final determination of eligibility after October 27, 1986, shall be— (A) The effective date of the rating, or (B) The date of notification, or © Any date between the dates specified in paragraphs (a)(2)(iii) (A) and (B) of this section as chosen by the eligible spouse. (iv) May not be changed once a spouse has chosen it as provided in paragraph (a)(2)(iii) of this section. (3) If eligibility arises under §21.3021(a)(3)(ii) of this part, the beginning date of the 10-year eligibility period is— (i) December 24, 1970, or (ii) The date the member of the Armed Forces on whose service eligibility is based was so listed by the Secretary concerned, whichever last occurs. (Authority: 38 U.S.C. 3501(a); Pub. L. 99–576) (b) Beginning date of eligibility period-surviving spouses. (1) If VA determines before December 1, 1968, that the veteran died of a service-connected disability, the beginning date of the 10-year period is December 1, 1968. (Authority: 38 U.S.C. 3512) (2) If the veteran's death occurred before December 1, 1968, but VA does not determine that the veteran died of a service-connected disability until after November 30, 1968, the beginning date of the 10-year period is the date on which VA determines that the veteran died of a service-connected disability. (3) If the veteran's death occurred before December 1, 1968, while a total, service-connected disability evaluated as permanent in nature was in existence, the beginning date of the 10-year period is December 1, 1968. (4) If the veteran's death occurred after November 30, 1968, and VA makes a final decision concerning the surviving spouse's eligibility for dependents' educational assistance before October 28, 1986, the beginning date of the 10-year period is— (i) The date of death of the veteran who dies while a total, service-connected disability evaluated as permanent in nature was in existence, or (ii) The date on which VA determines that the veteran died of a service-connected disability. (5) If the veteran's death occurred after November 30, 1968, and VA makes a final decision concerning the surviving spouse's eligibility for dependents educational assistance after October 27, 1986, VA will determine the beginning date of the 10-year period as follows. (i) If the surviving spouse's eligibility is based on the veteran's death while a total, service-connected disability evaluated as permanent in nature was in existence, the beginning date of the 10-year period is the date of death. (ii) If the surviving spouse's eligibility is based on the veteran's death from a service-connected disability, the surviving spouse will choose the beginning date of the 10-year period. That date will be no earlier than the date of death and no later than the date of the VA determination that the veteran's death was due to a service-connected disability. (Authority: 38 U.S.C. 3512(b); Pub. L. 99–576) (6) Once a surviving spouse has chosen a beginning date of eligibility as provided in paragraph (b)(5) of this section, the surviving spouse may not revoke that choice. (Authority: 38 U.S.C. 3512(b); Pub. L. 99–576) © Ending date of eligibility period. (1) The period of eligibility cannot exceed 10 years and can be extended only as provided in paragraph (d) of this section and §21.3047. (2) If eligibility arises before October 24, 1972, educational assistance based on a course of apprentice or other on-job training or correspondence approved under the provisions §§21.4256, 21.4261, and 21.4262 of this part will not be afforded later than October 23, 1982, unless the eligible spouse or surviving spouse qualifies for the extended period of eligibility provided in paragraph (d) of this section. (Authority: 38 U.S.C. 3512) (d) Extension to ending date. (1) The ending date of a spouse's period of eligibility may be extended when the spouse is enrolled and eligibility ceases for one of the following reasons: (i) The veteran is no longer rated permanently and totally disabled; (ii) The spouse is divorced from the veteran without fault on the spouse's part; or (iii) The spouse no longer is listed in any of the categories of §21.3021(a)(3)(ii) of this part. (2) If the spouse is enrolled in a school operating on a quarter or semester system, VA will extend the period of eligibility to the end of the quarter or semester, regardlesss of whether the spouse has reached the midpoint of the quarter, semester or term. (3) If the spouse is enrolled in a school not operating on a quarter or semester system, VA will extend the period of eligibility to the earlier of the following: (i) The end of the course, or (ii) 12 weeks. (4) If the spouse is enrolled in a course pursued exclusively by correspondence, VA will extend the period of eligibility to whichever of the following will result in the lessser expenditure: (i) The end of the course, or (ii) The total additional amount of instruction that $1,131 will provide. (Authority: 38 U.S.C. 3511(b)) (5) VA will not extend the period of eligibility when the spouse is pursuing training in a training establishment as defined in §21.4200© of this part. (6) An extension may not— (i) Exceed maximum entitlement, or (ii) Extend beyond the delimiting date specified in paragraph (a) of this section or §21.3047, as appropriate. (Authority: 38 U.S.C. 3511(b), 3512(b), 3532, 3586) [54 FR 33886, Aug. 17, 1989, as amended at 57 FR 29799, July 7, 1992; 57 FR 60735, Dec. 22, 1992; 62 FR 51784, Oct. 3, 1997; 62 FR 59579, Nov. 4, 1997]

But what effect will it have on 100% schedular and TDIU SC vets? I'm reading that it will impact TDIU vets if the SC disability (PTSD) causes them to be unable to leave the home to make a living. Same for 100% schedular vets. In the remanded case for a 100% schedular vet the BVA is asking that "The examiner should also opine as to whether the veteran is substantially confined to his dwelling or the immediate premises as a direct result of his service connected disabiities, that is, do these disabilities cause him to be unable to leave the house in order to earn a living." I think this will open the door for many and that an opinion from the OGC will be forthcoming. jmo pr

Thanks Carla, that's what I was looking for! Now to figure out what it means. pr

Pete - don't know that the VA will call it CUE but the issue remains open, as an inferred issue and if awarded would go back to date of original 100% award. The reason I say it's not CUE is because "no" decision was made. If they deny w/o a C&P exam I would definitely appeal. They may award based on what's in your current medical records. Just be sure your medical records get to your c-file. pr

Thanks Rick, I appreciate your post. pr

What's your take on the following statements taken from a BVA remand to the RO on a SC Housebound claim: "Recently the Court has clarified that housebound benefits are payable where the pertinent disabilities cause the veteran to be substantially confined to the home or its immediate premises, and that this requirement is met when the veteran is unable to leave the home to earn a living." Hartness v. Nicholson, 20 Vet. App. 216 (2006) Additionally, in the "case being Remanded for the following action" section it states: "The examiner should also opine as to whether the veteran is substantially confined to his dwelling or the immediate premises as a direct result of his service connected disabiities, that is, do these disabilities cause him to be unable to leave the house in order to earn a living." This was addressed on Hadit around 12/6 with regard to NSC pension but the BVA is using this in a SC claim. The SC remand is new and still unavailable at the BVA website. Thanks, pr

To the best of my knowledge she'll have choice of the effective date or notification date, whichever she decides is more favorable to her, provided you were married prior to or on the effective date. pr

Thanks Allan, saved me some research! And probably a couple of hours research time. pr

Thanks, everyone, for your input. I checked the definitions section in 38 CFR and found they would be eligible but must reside with the veteran. When we get his P&T we'll be sure to pursue those Chapter 35 benefits for them. pr

In reviewing my friend's c-file, I found he was hospitalized, back in 1983, complaining of a drinking problem and marital discord. His discharge summary lists 2 diagnoses: 1) Mixed character disorder, 2) Partial PTSD with depression. Now my question - if I recall correctly a VA hospital stay is supposed to be considered a "claim for increase." Since he was already receiving 50% for wound residuals, should the VA have rated these 2 diagnoses?? I think we should pursue it. pr

Helped a friend get rated for PTSD about 3 yrs ago. They awarded him 100% schedular for PTSD and conceded stressor w/o verification because he's a combat vet w/purple heart, for gunshot wounds. He now has ratings of 100%, 30%, 10%,10%,10% and 10%. When considering SMC for the 100+60 rule, do they use VA math on the additional percentages over 100%??? Or will his additionals count as 70%, thereby making him eligible for SMC? And if so, shouldn't the VA have rated him for the SMC, when they awarded him the 100%? Additionally, when he was awarded 100%, schedular, for PTSD, they failed to consider A&A and housebound, so we'll be pursuing that issue. I was amazed by his case. He had no diagnosis, treatment or meds for PTSD but based on the C&P was rated 100% in less then 9 months. (Correction, while reviewing his c-file, I found a PTSD diagnosis in a 1983 discharge summary) Prior to this he had been receiving 50% since his discharge from the Army in 1969. Thanks in dvance. pr

Must stepchildren live with the veteran in order to claim them as dependents on veteran's compensation?? pr

Who was in combat "day-in/day-out, 24/7" ?

Contact the Patient Rep or the VAMC director. They usually will fill outside prescriptions provided they're medications found in the VA formulary. May need a request from your privae doc, also. About 4-5 yrs back VA directed their docs to do it and made a big public announcement of it. pr

Terry's right, should be the 29th. When the 1st falls on a holiday payment is made on the last banking day before the holiday. They never consider Saturday a banking day. Should get the raise in this check. pr

Everthing I see says they are AAA++++. Thanks, chief 313 pr

Thanks for posting, Bound. I think she's decided to use them. They seem to have a good record. pr