Jump to content

asknod

HadIt.com Elder
  • Content count

    1,234
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    56

asknod last won the day on May 30

asknod had the most liked content!

Community Reputation

1,437 Excellent

About asknod

  • Rank
    E-8 Senior Chief Petty Officer
  • Birthday 04/01/1951

Contact Methods

  • MSN
    asknod@gmail.com
  • Website URL
    http://asknod.org

Profile Information

  • Location
    Gig Harbor, Washington
  • Interests
    TR-6 Sports Cars, old guns that go rat-a-tat-tat.

Previous Fields

  • Service Connected Disability
    290%
  • Branch of Service
    USAF/ Air America
  • Hobby
    VA Nonattorney practitioner. HCV 100%; PCT 100%; anemia 60%;Cryoglobulinemia/Fibromyalgia 40%, Scars 30%: Tinnitus 10%

Recent Profile Visitors

4,280 profile views
  1. Am I there yet?

    My father gave me one piece of advice that I've borne well, I hope, James. "Son, you haven't experienced life until you have done something for someone with no thought of recompense." While I'll never fill his shoes, his actions and words inspire me every day. I'm very honored to be entrusted to do what I do.
  2. Here's Mr. Clemons case in asknodspeak. https://asknod.org/2011/09/27/cavc-clemons-v-shinseki-2009-not-an-m-d/
  3. hi asknod. i sent you an email tonight asking a question.... hope you can view and get back to me

  4. smc a&a

    I do the Perry Mason work. I can't be everywhere at once. It took me 28 years to learn how to beat the pukes. Your mission is to disseminate the benefits.
  5. smc a&a

    If you are seeking SMC L for A&A for the CMT, VA will require a positive 21-2680 from a doctor If you do not have an IMO. Speaking of which, I do hope you've collected all your military records from the NPRC. Your claims file might have them in it but that is not always the case. I had one where the STRs were about three years behind a Vet's filing in 1970 and didn't show up until we went looking for them when we filed in 2015. Bingo. §3.156(c) and a mega retro check. To play VA poker, you need to see all the cards. Best of luck, sir. P.S. Didn't anyone notice the water tasted funny at Camp LeJeune?
  6. CUE Karmageddon

    Roger that, Big Poppa, but imagine how far we've come from "a well-grounded claim" in the pre-2001/pre-VCAA days. Nowadays, N&ME can be as vicarious as a statement from your wife, a new letter from your doctor re your ailments or finding old STRs from service which were not part of the record before the agency in the last adjudication process. Our rights as claimants continue to increase exponetially each and every day. I think the biggest one is allowing JSRRC records in as 3.156(c) evidence allowing for a much earlier effective date, assuming, of course, you had the wherewithal to have filed when you exited the service. In some instances, when we appeal all the way to the CAVC or Fed. Circus, we create new case law for those who follow in our steps later. Think of Joe Fenderson, Norm Gilbert, Benito Layno and all the others who lost but made it possible for us to win at this poker game. Worry less about what the VA adjudication system isn't and focus on the miracle that even allows us to file a Motion to Revise or to keep reopening it until we prevail. No other comparable system exists in constitutional law. It is unique to the VA and no other. The absolute best part is being allowed to practice law and fix these antique inequities for Vets. If VA ever decides to be honest and grant what is due without a fight, I'd be out of a job in short order. Which, incidentally, would suit me just fine. I'd rather spend my last days farting around in a VA-provided greenhouse! Another thing many of us overlook is the value of what Theresa created here. How many of you would still be dead in the water without the knowledge of our combined experiences discussed here? Very few Veterans websites have such a valuable collection of wins and a careful explanation of how to repair prior errors. The only thing I observe is that some tend to offer advice based entirely on their personal experience and presume it is applicable in all instances. In all my years doing this (28), I see one constant-no two claims are remotely alike. Each one is a unique set of circumstances that requires legal insight-not experience. I stared at Malcolm's claim for six years and walked past a simple, basic error even a VLJ and a CAVC Judge and her acolytes missed. I was also itching to use my newly-coined word Karmageddon, too. Another NOVA atty. friend gives it a 6-1 odds of a win at Houston. My VLJ friend gives it a 2-1 based on who gets the docket in DC and a 5/9 of a reversal and win at the CAVC- all of which are better odds than emptying your wallet at a casino. Win or Die
  7. I love antique CUE. VA makes so many mistakes it's almost impossible not to find one of these in your files. Finding another after you find one in the same decision is a hoot, too. https://asknod.org/2017/08/05/malcolm-in-the-middle-part-iv-karmageddon/
  8. CUE for Peripheral Neuropathy

    $99.95- guaranteed customer satisfaction. Nationwide. They were the cat's pajamas back in the sixties in Virginia before I left for the SEA Olympics in 69.
  9. CUE for Peripheral Neuropathy

    <<<<<<I've heard that SMC will only be back-paid for one year.>>>>> Where do these rumors originate? What a hoot. No, My dearest JGStarted. SMC is payable from the date it can clearly be shown medically that you are entitled to the SMC rating. I'm doing one for r(1) in Phoenix as we speak. VA tried to say we blew through the one year limit to file a NOD for it. I had to call them up and explain it doesn't need a 526. The attorney coordinator in the Director's office was a rater and had no clue how SMC worked. He'd never even written a grant for an r(1). I refiled him for Parkinson's @ 100% and asked for LOU of lower extremities and the SMC (o) whammy on top of it. He's on for an early August c&p. When they finally give me the r(1), I'll pop the doctor's letter from last Halloween (2016) on the LOU for the effective date. I may even try back to 2011 depending on what I can find in the c file. It's fairly large at 3,200 pgs. Win or die.
  10. CUE for Peripheral Neuropathy

    As a postscript. I've only won one CUE claim for myself- about $70 K based on equitable tolling of a claim. Berta has me whipped in that category. My favorite is §3.156(c) claims. It's like shooting fish in a barrel.
  11. CUE for Peripheral Neuropathy

    CUE claims are never "combined" with other claims for new ailments or increases. VA has four "lanes" for claims now- new claims/increases, Appeals and CUE (which includes §1151 claims) and lastly, Special Operations like homeless/ medical exigency. I didn't include VR&E or dependency issues in adjudications discussions. One facet VA will hammer home is that you had an opportunity to file a NOD and object to the decision made in 2009. Ignore that argument. Remember, you are not a doctor. There is no MD after your name. Even though Clemons v. Shinseki was not case law at the time, you can cite to Espiritu v. Derwinski for the proposition that you are not one (an MD) and are not expected to be able to phrase your claim for benefits precisely. It's enough to file the claim imprecisely and let VA deduce what it is you are asking for. Once read, the medrecs will illuminate even the most dense rater or his supervisor. By law, VA is required to examine your claim and "infer" or deduce what, exactly, you are attempting to say or file for. For instance, if you'd filed for a SFW that wrecked your eyeball, they are obligated to infer whether there are peripheral claims associated with it (residuals) such as retained metal fragments which can never be debrided and the possibility of a permanent disability. VA tends to look strictly at refractive error after it heals and ignores 38 CFR §4.1 through §4.10. They studiously avoid any in-depth investigation even when they have §4.84a DC 6009 (eye, injury of, unhealed) at their fingertips for application. And, much like Mr. Clemons in the above decision, they are more that willing to open a whole new claim for DC 6009 in 2017 because you mistakenly filed for SMC K for loss of, or loss of use of, one eye or DC 6029 Aphakia. Always remember who you are dealing with. Think GEICO. They would rather pay you for a little bondo work and an Earl Schieb touch up paint job rather than a whole new left front quarter panel. They purposefully try to minimize the scope of the injury and focus myopically on what you claimed-not what you actually suffer from. When you object, they proceed to argue something totally irrelevant. It's like herding cats. When doing CUE claims, I'm anal about focusing on case or controversy. I lay out §3.105 at the beginning and then proceed to point to the error over and over again. Redundancy is often required to keep them on subject.
  12. Veteran/child Of Nam Vet Exposed To Ao

    Something few Veterans realize is that a properly constructed IMO for any disease can be related back to CL claims as well as AO ones or fuel/chemical exposure to JP-4, toluene, MEK etc.. The only metric that needs to employed is a well-reasoned thesis on not just the "at least as likely as not" but also peer-reviewed articles or the Merck Manual that attributes certain exposures to well-documented cancerous side-effects. A Veterans Law Judge is allowed great leeway in deciding an appeal. If the evidence presented by you is not rebutted by a BVA-requested IME, you will invariably win- assuming it isn't too far-fetched or involves Internet articles. Always remember, the VARO denies your claim 85% of the time. When you go to the BVA on appeal, VA rarely shows up to rebut any new evidence you present unless it's a CUE claim going back to the 70s-90s. You can insulate yourself against a time-alligator remand for more VARO opinions if you file a request to waive review of the new evidence in the first instance and keep it at the BVA. With the huge backlog, they are under the gun to resolve these appeals ASAP. One of my VLJ friends tells me they are required to crank out 1.25 decisions per day. That can be a remand, a grant or a denial. Obviously, if you present new and material evidence that properly and cogently encompasses the three Caluza elements, the Judge is going to grant your claim. I should add there are certain appeals that are too far-fetched to be believable. I've read BVA decisions where Vets tried to turn a cold annotated in their STRs 40 years ago into evidence of chronic COPD. You need a good 40-year paper trail for that to fly.
  13. SMC for two single 100% ratings ?

    Special Monthly compensation was granted by Congress and they're pretty stingy unless we're talking about their paycheck. As for us, disability is a variable open to VA's interpretation. I find fighting them is like herding cats. They'll do anything they can to appear dense and dodge the problem. If cornered, they order up the wrong DBQ or do x rays and "forget" to look for SFWs-but manage to look for old broken bones. SMC will always be a fight. Getting what is properly owed is due to ignorance and oversight. Few raters are even familiar with it and often overlook obvious entitlement. SMC S, due to our efforts here and my site, is at an all-time high now. VA simply never looked to see if we were entitled to it. The M 21, which is supposed to "detect" it, never does. As for the higher SMC ratings, unless the disability is blatant, VA won't grant it until you point it out. Even then you stand a long battle establishing the true date your entitlement began. VA generally grants SMC the day you ask for it but the true date is medically determined by the evidence of record-often years before you discovered they'd been funning you over it.
  14. SMC for two single 100% ratings ?

    Try this one on for size-- https://asknod.org/2013/02/27/special-monthly-compensation-what-is-it/ There is no benefit such as you describe specifically for a Vet with two 100% schedular ratings. I have two 100% schedular ratings myself. Here's when the SMC benefit you are describing kicks in. If you become helpless as defined in 38 CFR §3.350 and §3.352 for A&A, you qualify for a "bump" up from 100% to SMC L. This applies independently of if you are already entitled to SMC S. Alternatively, you could have loss of, or loss of use of both lower extremities or loss of, or loss of use of one hand and one foot and qualify for SMC L as well. But... once you qualify for SMC L, if you have an additional 100% (real scheduler-not TDIU) rating unrelated to your first 100% schedular rating, you get a bump up from L to M. Concurrently, if you have any singular rating 50% or higher or a combination of ratings entitling you to 50% or higher, then you would qualify for a half step up from SMC M to SMC M 1/2. You could have three 100% schedulars and get a bump from L to N and then pile on the 50% or greater extras. You can see you cannot get on this "bump" wagon until you qualify for SMC L-even if you are getting SMC S. If you have SMC L for helplessness (Aid and Attendance) and you have loss of use of lower extremities (or hand and foot), you automatically advance to SMC O. The party doesn't end there. You are then also entitled to SMC R(1). As far as I know, this is one of the few examples of legal VA pyramiding to get a higher rating.
  15. Actually, the compensation rating for someone over 20% is reduced to 10% sixty one days after incarceration and not restored until after release to, at a minimum, a half-way house or parole. If comp. payment is 10%, then you get paid 5% from day sixty one on. See 38 CFR § 3.665(d)(1),(2). a
×