FormerMember

T would be for application if your injuries were not permanent and total such as a 70% rating for a TBI /§4.124a rating under DC 8045. Sometimes VA cheats and just says PTSD/70% and SMC T for about 24 months and then poof!. No more T. T stands for Temporary in this game. The funds come from the VHA and they are doing this ratings game- not the VBA "Examiners". That means a registered nurse is your "T" executioner. Don't try to improvise or use some, but not all, the magic words. Do not dodge the intent of the regulation. VA doctors are not really supposed to do this but some do. Right now, they are almost job-proof because they are understaffed. If they were flush, the offenders could discover their upcoming contract wasn't renewed.

The doctor has to pronounce the words in haec verba "Mr. J Frei is so helpless as to be in need of the aid and attendance of another." Some of the other things he could mention you can't do or are impaired in are: §3.352(a): (a)Basic criteria for regular aid and attendance and permanently bedridden. The following will be accorded consideration in determining the need for regular aid and attendance ( § 3.351(c)(3): inability of claimant to dress or undress himself (herself), or to keep himself (herself) ordinarily clean and presentable; frequent need of adjustment of any special prosthetic or orthopedic appliances which by reason of the particular disability cannot be done without aid (this will not include the adjustment of appliances which normal persons would be unable to adjust without aid, such as supports, belts, lacing at the back, etc.); inability of claimant to feed himself (herself) through loss of coordination of upper extremities or through extreme weakness; inability to attend to the wants of nature; or incapacity, physical or mental, which requires care or assistance on a regular basis to protect the claimant from hazards or dangers incident to his or her daily environment. “Bedridden” will be a proper basis for the determination. For the purpose of this paragraph “bedridden” will be that condition which, through its essential character, actually requires that the claimant remain in bed. The fact that claimant has voluntarily taken to bed or that a physician has prescribed rest in bed for the greater or lesser part of the day to promote convalescence or cure will not suffice. It is not required that all of the disabling conditions enumerated in this paragraph be found to exist before a favorable rating may be made. The particular personal functions which the veteran is unable to perform should be considered in connection with his or her condition as a whole. It is only necessary that the evidence establish that the veteran is so helpless as to need regular aid and attendance, not that there be a constant need. Determinations that the veteran is so helpless, as to be in need of regular aid and attendance will not be based solely upon an opinion that the claimant's condition is such as would require him or her to be in bed. They must be based on the actual requirement of personal assistance from others. Got the Picture?

You need a doctor to actually attest to that. Your wife's statement is probative lay evidence but not "medical evidence".

Entitlement to a disease or injury arises the day the injury occurred on active duty. With that said, entitlement to VA benefits arises when it can be ascertained a Veteran claimant has evinced via a written request for compensation for the listed disease or a similar distinguishable one. Prior to 2015, you could file it on a sheet of toilet paper. Since then we're required to file it on an Intent form or a 526EZ. See §3.155. A claim remains pending until there is some ascertainable evidence it has been adjudicated, either explicitly or implicitly. This evidence would be a rating decision either granting or denying it in your c-file. All you have to do is file. If you did not file for the injury/disease upon ETS, there is no claim. If the Army gave you a disability comp. check for $30,000 when you ETS'd, that doesn't constitute a claim with VA. That is a separate matter. I hear way too many Vets who finally win say "They should pay me back to when I got out because this was what was wrong back then." Usually, even if you did file and lose, a CUE claim won't cut it. You cannot argue how the evidence was weighed using a Motion to Revise.

Here's your error. Simply adding up a bunch of ratings for disparate illnesses which are unrelated does not a 100% schedular rating make. A 100% schedular rating is just that- the highest rating attainable for that disease or injury. In the case of Hepatitis C under DC 7354, a rating of 100% is available. In the case of a DDD for a bad back, there is no 100% schedular available-just a maximum of 60%. Adding up a lot of ratings this way creates a combined rating of 100% which is a horse of an entirely different color. In any case, it's immaterial. The only way a 100% schedular rating would benefit you would be if you were rated for SMC at the L rate for a disability like A&A or loss of use of your lower extremities. In that case, a 100% schedular for, say, PTSD, would advance you to the next higher rate- or SMC M. If you had a TDIU for PTSD at 70%, you could not substitute it in the place of a 100% schedular to advance to M-but rather SMC L 1/2. See §3.350(f)(3)(4). You almost need a PhD in VA law to figure out SMC. I even have VA attorneys email me and ask me to sort out a fustercluck of disabilities to figure out if they can get a higher SMC.

Consider getting your doctor to fill out a 10-0383 VAF 10-0383 Catastrophic Disability Enrollment Approval Request.pdf

Check this out, folks. You need to get your claims files and examine them very closely. https://asknod.org/2018/08/19/cue-get-the-fugo-out-of-here/

And then there's that intractable problem with the AWOL VSO rep... Mighty convenient.

<<<<severeanxiety,depression>>>>>>> <<<<<<<When my unit came down on orders to deploy to Afghanistan is recieved orders to go Korea.Which made feel like a coward.>>>>>>> I do not mean to be rude or argumentative but how does a change of orders cause a major depressive disorder? I was bummed out when I got assigned to Thailand instead of Vietnam in 1970. Two months later I got my wish but I didn't get bent brain syndrome until I got into combat. Can anyone enlighten me as to how or why you would get MDD over a non-combat assignment to Korea? What am I missing? Surely, if this reaction is prevalent, there must be some of you here on this board who can explain it to us. VA is going to be asking some rather pointed questions as well. Vets serve their country. Some sign up in peacetime and some in war. If you signed up in a time of peace, it was understood all that could change in a heartbeat. Think Grenada or the Middle East. However, it sure doesn't demean your service if you didn't serve in combat. Trust me. You didn't miss anything except warm beer, no ice or soda water for the Scotch, really skanky food and the stink of dead bodies. As for depression, I can understand if you went on R&R and didn't get a CIB or a PH but all your buddies got nuked by friendly fire and were killed. But seriously? Depression over deploying to Korea versus Afstan and missing out on combat? I don't mean to disparrage your feelings of depression and anxiety. They are debilitating illnesses and can cause other secondaries. Generally speaking, VA is going to ask you some really hard questions- far harder than what I'm asking here. You will need a stressor that you feel precipitated the MDD in order to get SC for your condition. That would generally be, at a bare minimum, fear of the enemy overrunning your position or some like stressor. If you do not have that, VA is going to be a bit dismissive of your contentions. VA doctors often spot other ailments and diagnose you with them. Unfortunately, that doesn't make them service connected. Not everything that happens to us is SC in spite of what we'd like to believe. Best of luck on your quest for more/higher ratings, sir.

Negative. You are looking at the ICD 10 Codes. The VHA is the medical arm of VA. The VBA is the compensation side of the House. You will never see or get the Confirmed Rating Sheet unless you can get into VBMS or get your claims file. If you are wondering what one looks like, here's an example. VHA doesn't have or keep this info. P.S. Well, hush my mouth. I just received a decision on one of my Vets this morning and lo and behold- they sent a Confirmed Rating decision out with it. Maybe VA is changing or maybe it's because I'm his representative. It's really immaterial as I could see it on VBMS over two weeks ago. CRD.pdf

95% of Vets have no idea what Diagnostic Code they're rated under or if it's a hybrid built up using §4.27. I caught VA using the 8515/8520 family of peripheral nerves to rate multiple sclerosis even though they have a rating for it. That's against the law in 48 states.

File a VAF 3288 for your claims file. You will find them immediately after each rating decision in the .pdf. We call it a confirmed rating decision but the label at the top calls it a rating decision. It shows the date, the POA and the exact diagnostic code from the VASRD.

The only good thing to come of idiot VA employees losing their computers by leaving them in unlocked cars is that the knowledge is now on the VBMS and not in their laptop. Thank goodness for small favors. As for taking the c file home to "massage" it, boy howdy is that illegal in 50 states. I have a Vet on appeal in San Juan PR. I went through his VBMS file and found lots of stuff that was not there in 1970 when he filed. What was still missing was an x-ray of his liver in 1971. He asked for a copy of the file in 2001 and they sent him a small handful of goodies. Guess what they gave him. Yep. The 1971 x ray. To this day that x-ray is still not in the file. It even has those two holes punched in the top of the sheet proving it was in the file at one time. We have a Videoconference in front of the VLJ on the 24th. I don't usually do the video nor do I recommend it but I don't have time to fly down there. I think this is going to prove due process was violated like Phil Cushman. You don't have to prove they changed the records. If they shredded part of them, that's just as damning. There goes the presumption of regularity that the c-file is sacrosanct.

Buck, think of paper claims files as you would old telephones with the dialing wheel. We've evolved into the 21st Century. You log in to VBMS at home. I do it about 4 times a day. Hell, I can even download and print out records. Believe it or not, I run into a lot of VA employees who work 3 days a week (Mon. Wed. Fri) at home and telecommute. In fact, my Travel Board Hearings coordinator in Seattle (Tammy) does this. I email her and ask if they want any cookies when I come over to do a hearing. Hell, most of them read my blog too. Make no mistake about this claims business. We all smile and shake hands when we meet- but-invariably there's a dagger in their left hand. Sadly, most VA employees are unaware of what happens to a claim (denial) after it leaves their hands. They see the naked entry product only. The M 21 is what determines the fate at the regional level. On July 11th I had a DRO hearing in Jackson, Mississippi- on the record- no less, where she said they don't use 38 CFR . Well boy howdy is that different when you get a SOC back listing dang near every CFR there is. I hear pretty soon they're going to put in a drive thru window service for Vets. You don't even have to get out of your vehicle to file...

Well, not exactly. VA has a lot of hospitals with...wait for it... lots of doctors. These doctors can make extra money taking your records home and formulating an Independent Medical Evaluation (IME) which will not be in your favor. IMEs most frequently, are asked for at the appellate level-i.e. a Veteran Law Judge (VLJ) at the BVA is unhappy with the sloppy VA Examiner's negative nexus. The VLJ sends out for another. And, just like an Independent Medical Opinion (IMO), they review your records and make a decision based on them. You will never meet the author of your IME that sandbags you. If you keep tabs on these jokers, you'll see several doctor's names pop up frequently. One with quite a few negative IMEs up and down the Atlantic seaboard is Dr. Shirin DeSilva. This joker is a specialist in so many fields, one wonders how he ever got out of Med School to actually practice medicine. A good IMO shouldn't cost more than $2K. It's too competitive nowadays. Mednick is far more affordable. Medconnect and Medscape are other outfits who supplies an identical service at the same price. As I have mentioned before, you cannot hire them unless you are an attorney or agent. Dr. Bash simply provides a higher level of service directly to those too busy or uneducated in how the system works. The higher fee represents the fact that he generally flies in to examine you. The VA's problem with Dr. Bash is simple. If you set up shop to do this (IMOs), eventually you run into a Vet you simply can't help. To my knowledge, I've never heard about any of his clients who were unable to get a nexus from him. VA raters and VLJs are mighty leery of his product. Essentially, the only difference between an IMO and an IME is the former is a genuine independent opinion. I've had psychiatrists at Mednick decline to write a confirming IMO because they weren't convinced. An IME, on the other hand, is VA buying off Dr. DeSilva with 30 pieces of silver to say it ain't so.

As agents/attorneys, we get to use VA Change Management Agents(CMAs). They're like Chatty Cathy dolls and tell us everything. No. Seattle is the destination of all RAMP apps. You might file it at W-S, but they transship it to Seattle. A few ROs are becoming special HQs for certain types of claims. The rest do all the regular claims. I just had one of my Vets get his decision out of W-S last month. The DRO called me from there to explain what she was granting and what she was not granting. Used to be, they always did your NODs, DRO reviews and CUE stuff at your own RO but no more. The NWQ is the wave of the future. I just had a SMC determination done on my Vet in Montana by a rater in Manila PI. Yep. It was wrong but so is about 85% of the stuff they do. If you believe Peggy, you need psychiatric help. Did they tell you the Tooth Faery is doing your appeal too?

Seattle (VBASEAT346) is the only Regional Office that handles RAMP. They do all 56 of the ROs . Nashville does Camp LeJeune claims etc. etc. Welcome to the National Work Queue.

Correction: you have 120 days to file a NOA with the Court appealing a BVA decision-not sixty days. The sixty-day suspense date applies strictly to finalizing your substantive appeal you filed on the VA9 at your SOJ. Abbreviation updates: SOJ is station of jurisdiction. Fort Fumble employees disdain the abbreviation AOJ (Agency of Jurisdiction) even though BVA and the Courts call it that. The Appeals Management Center, formerly abbreviated as the AMC is now the Appeals Management Office or AMO. ------------------ FYI Ran into this lovely form (VAF 10-0383) VA has hidden from us for aeons. Thought some of you seriously disabled Vets will need it to confirm you are "catastrophically disabled" Funny, if you go to the VA WARMS computer site, it's nowhere to be found... Bon appetit. . VAF 10-0383 Catastrophic Disability Enrollment Approval Request.pdf

A c&p examiner is not there to diagnose you. He merely reports what he finds. As far as I know there is no Tinnitusmeter that can measure it. It's a purely subjective diagnosis. If you never mentioned it in service (tinnitus-not hearing loss), then he cannot dx it in a c&p. The VA examiner can but he didn't. Seems you need to go back to the Caluza triangle we teach here. That's the recipe for a chicken dinner winner. I hope you took your military medrecs in with you to show the c&p guy. That almost always works.

As a nonattorney practitioner, I would find it difficult to accept a Vet who had fired an attorney. The operable word would be trust. I have had combative Vets who seek my representation and then begin arguing with me about how to adjudicate something. If they were so knowledgeable on how to do this, why come to me and tell me how to? I belong to NOVA and we are not a cliqueish club. I don't recall meeting Julie Glover but I would point out she is forbidden by law to "barter" away any of your claims without consulting and receiving your permission to do so first. VSOs, on the other hand, can, and often do, sell you down the river legally-with or without your permission. Now, with that said, I have asked Vets if I have permission to barter away low value claims such as tinnitus hemorrhoids or hearing loss (assuming it isn't life threatening like Buck's). The reason is simple. If I can get TDIU for PTSD or an amalgam of disabilities that qualify for TDIU, I can go to a DRO and say we'll toss in the nit noy crap if he'll grant the IU. DROs can barter but not "on the record". We do it strictly off the record because it's illegal to do so. I've done this a bunch of times but I always had the Vet's permission beforehand. Sounds like Ms. Glover might have overstepped her mandate. However, she was trying to get you the highest and best ratings she could and she would never do it out of spite or stupidity. I personally believe you shot yourself in the foot by firing her but that's based on your side of the story. I might revise that belief if I found out she had acted unprofessionally. This is one of the reasons I have a rock solid attorney/client fee agreement that spells it out ahead of time. Terminating your hired help puts a black mark in their OGC personnel folder. Worse, if you tell the next potential attorney/agent you try to hire why you are there (that you need a new law dog because you canned the old one), it worries them that if they upset you, you may fire them too. There are approximately 750 real VA attorneys out there who do VA claims exclusively. There are 350 agents. There are 20 million Vets and 3 million in the system actively seeking compensation. Do the math. There simply are not enough of us to go around. If you 86 your hired help, you are going to have the devil's own time finding another. If you lie or fail to disclose it, we'll find out anyway because it's right there in your claims file. If Ms. Glover has politely declined to waive her legal fees, does that mean she won something for you and is entitled to 20% of it? Do you expect her to walk away from any payment due and owing as agreed to in your fee agreement? If so, what is the purpose of a fee agreement at all? I'm confused on one point here. Your post says Ms. Glover withdrew two appeals with her "contact" at the St Petersburg VA Regional Office. Were these claims on appeal or merely in the formative stage? In other words, had they been denied and appealed on a NOD? Depending on what you won, I'd say a potential 10% for tinnitus or a 0% for hearing loss was a smart ploy if she bartered them for a higher compensable rating on any other claims or IU. We have lots of techniques to win claims-some we don't discuss. Vets do not understand the process which is why they hire us to work our magic. If you fire one of us, you better have a darn good reason because you will have the problems you now see. I don't cherry pick clients for the dough but I can sure testify I'm one of the few who do not. I won't mention names here but a lot do. Just a heads up- hearing claims are like cheap Mardi Gras beads and not worth much. I only deal in Vets who are dying because they have very complex, difficult claims no one knows how to win. I really don't need the money because I don't have $200,000 in student loans at 5.8%. As for submitting a N&ME with an IMO at a DRO hearing, I will point out the operation of law. The Decision Review Officer is limited by law to review an appeal based on the facts found. Undoubtedly, further medical inquiry can be undertaken with a view towards further developing the claim. However, in this regard, the Court has cautioned VA against seeking an additional medical opinion where favorable evidence in the record is unrefuted, and indicated that it would not be permissible to undertake further development if the sole purpose was to obtain evidence against an appellant's claim. See Mariano v. Principi, 17 Vet. App. 305, 312 (2003). See also Kahana v. Shinseki, 24 Vet. App. 428 (2011); McLendon v. Nicholson, 20 Vet.App. 79, 85 (2006 (In any event, the lack of medical evidence in service does not constitute substantive negative evidence). As for whether a VSO or an attorney/agent is a better advocate, would you hire a dance instructor to fix your car? An atty/agent has to learn law-VA law specifically. A VSO has to be able to recognize a 4138 from a 0958 and understand how to fill it out. That is pretty much the sum of what he needs to know to 'practice'. With that said, I do hope you obtain new legal counsel because it sounds like it would be advisable to have a Sherpa.

I suggest all of you who feel slighted by my comments above either reread the posts or look up the word "template". This thread has been hijacked and I am just as guilty as others. For that I apologize. However, I will never apologize for correcting what anyone can clearly see as untruths or outright bad advice. One size does not fit all nor will it ever in VA adjudications. Hadit allows Vets to offer advice on how they solved their dilemma. Using another's technique to win is often like trying to wear another's clothes. Sadly, many Vets discover this when they try to utilize advice at Vet's help sites. While it may be helpful or instructive, it must be taken in context or it may backfire. What we are seeing here is the "too many chiefs and not enough Indians" syndrome" or more succinctly "My advice is correct and yours isn't." Hey, folks. Fly at it but do not insist I agree with your misconstrual of VA law. I do this day in and day out-and most of it pro bono. Most of you do it once or twice and obtain what you seek. You do not continue to keep up with changing statute and regulation. I do not talk down to Vets. I do not give them false hope. I provide a service when they finally have no one to turn to for representation. Virtually all of the Vets I represent are very ill and have had no success with their purported representative at a major VSO. I lost a Vietnam 11 Bravo (LRRP) this morning to respiratory cancer. He did two tours back to back like me. Two BS's with Vs and a PH. I now have the unenviable task of consoling his widow this week, going to his funeral, filing for substitution and getting a nexus to fight it. I do it because if the shoe was on the other foot, he would have done it for me. I met him here. I try to provide general knowledge couched as advice. I do not offer specific advice or counseling because that is against the code of conduct for attorneys and agents. If you disagree with my advice, it helps if you could cite to the specific regulation you feel I am wrong about. Ad hominem (google it) attacks about the need for earplugs are pointless. It is said you can lead a horse to water but you cannot make him drink. The adage more than applies here. To tell someone they have to have an IMO in order to submit a winning claim for PTSD is misinformation. To baldly state that CUE is "VERY RARE" is a gross distortion of the truth (read "untruth"). Only a novitiate or someone grossly misinformed would make such a comment. To what purpose? For those of you without a dictionary, misinformation and untruths mean you are giving your fellow Veterans false information. To tell them they need to obtain a PTSD nexus initially from a private source insures they will lose and really damages their chances of success later on on appeal. If you feel the overwhelming desire to give advice, make sure you read the statute and regulation that controls it first. Many of you depend on your fellow Vets here to offer useful information but you endanger all of Theresa's hard work on this site if the advice you offer is useless, inapplicable or worse-detrimental to their claim. That is all I set out to say when I entered this thread. After many years of doing this, my personal experience is that many who suffer major mental disorders are very sensitive to any criticism and consider their particular experiences unique and applicable across a broad spectrum. I certainly do not seek to upset any of you but it's apparent it grates on your ears. Hadit was designed to help all of you, not devolve into arguments about who is "more right" or has a more spot-on experience. I offer my past battles as advice only, and now, my working knowledge from real experience as an accredited Veterans advocate as help for all of you. You most certainly are free to ignore it. Henceforth, I will don earplugs before delving into these posts. I apologize for any who feel marginalized by my comments. My intentions were purely altruistic. P.S. In reference to Buck's comment above. I wish to clarify my aircraft was not shot down. My gomer Air America pilot, Jack Smith had a hangover and made a left turn into a mountain. We went from 75 kts to 0 in just under 10 feet when the A/C stalled and augered into the trees. We actually made it about 1 klic inside Thailand when he pulled this stunt so it cannot be truthfully said we went down in Laos. Besides, Laos wasn't enemy territory. It was neutral but we did a lot of sightseeing up there. Regardless of what Buck says, I am a Veteran just like all of you- no better, no worse, no more or less important than any of you and certainly not unique in any respect. We had a 40% casualty rate with all of them KIA-BNR.

<<<<This topic is about PTSD....>>>>>> Navy4life. I beg to disagree. This post is not about PTSD. It's about getting secondaries to PTSD. It has now devolved into the perceived secret of how to get SC for anything including PTSD. I merely wish to dispel the misinformation I read here. You cannot win if you file for PTSD with a PTSD dx from a private doc-be it on toilet paper or a DBQ form. CUEs are not rare. We just don't always see them. Are Berta's eight (?) CUEs an anomaly or simply an aberration? Attached is a claim I filed for R(1) in Phoenix last fall. But look how VA approached it. They went back and CUE'd themselves over an earlier denial of same-for R(t). Yes, I had a good nexus. Take a gander. 9 CUEs in just one claim. And you think CUE is rare? PTSD merely requires a different approach than arriving with a full-blown nexus. Very, very few of you Vets are ever going to luck out and hornswoggle a VA doctor into a PTSD IMO. No two PTSD claims are alike. In fact, no two VA claims of the any sort are alike. Nevertheless, the repair order is the same in every case. Some Vets do not have glaring stressors in their records. Some don't even have combat medals like my Vet above. Shoot, I have 3 combat Vs.I had a devil of a time convincing them I should get the §1154(b) combat presumption like Buck until I produced the evidence in 2013 with a revised DD 215. VA doesn't just accept your word. I'm glad I never applied for bent brain. If I had, I couldn't be accredited. Hep C claims are also different, Consider this. You couldn't have a dx of Hep C in your STRs in 1968 because they didn't discover the disease until 1989. They came up with a test for it in 1992. So... how do you win? 1) file. 2) get denied and let them hang themselves and say the jetguns didn't transmit Hep C to you (Remember that finding of fact); 3) develop your risk factor (tattoo in service; STD in service; inoculations via jetgun); 4) submit NOD without a nexus. Then, N4L, I guarantee you will lose. But not because you still lack a nexus. Every single one of these has gone to the BVA. VA Examiners will say it's too speculative to opine. They force it up to the BVA because they are not allowed to decide it at the SOJ (Station of Jurisdiction). It's unwritten but real. When you appeal to BVA, that's when you plunk down your nexus letter. Since the BVA's backlog is out the door, they review the incoming and cherry pick the easy ones. If you have a nexus and you file the motion to waive review in the first instance at the RO level, they immediately grant it. Trust me when I say the idiots at your RO are not going to show up and file a new IMO against you. Never look at any two claims the same way. If you get a atty/agent on appeal after VSO representation, the Courts view the VSO as a gomer with no legal training. This gives us the opportunity to finesse your claims by repairing them. Quite simply, you had Bozo the clown for a rep but now you have a licensed Sherpa to fix it. Make no mistake about it. VLJs respect us and our knowledge. Technique. Course knowledge. Each claim must be viewed in its context. Feel the Force...Be the Force. Leave no one behind -just like Theresa says. Not on a Jungle Trail. My buddies and I had to do that once. Never again. Never. That's why I chose to do this. r1 redacted.PDF

Loyal, get serious. I never suggested that you could win solely based on a private Nexus. Note I said you have to be denied first. That generally happens to 85% of us the first time out. Remember my recipe. Rebut the denial on the VA's findings of Fact. P.S. I forgot to add. As of 2010, VBA forbid VHA doctors to dx PTSD or be terminated. What you hear about in this regard is that many VAMC's are right next door to a teaching hospital who supplies Doctors who practice at both venues. Sometimes you can get the "private" doctor to write your IMO because VA has no control over him/her. The term "white wall" is a phalanx of doctors who will never argue with one another. VA pays VES shrinks to deny. VA offers VES Docs 30 pieces of silver four times a day to deny Vets. Many retired shrinks are tempted. But if you produce a valid IMO that looks like the one above, the VES doctor will be forced to concur. Mine rebutted every finding of fact by VA. The purpose of the followup VA c&p is to correct an "obvious" error of diagnosis-i.e. say that the Vet now does have bent brain. That is the real secret to your win. As my daddy used to say, "It ain't a f-up until you can't fix it. I guess I haven't run into one I can't fix yet.

<<<If you have a solid claim in the first place, there will never be a need to go to the BVA.>>> I get a bang out of Vets who use their own claims experience as the template for everyone else's when giving advice. Obviously Navy4life has never filed claims for CUE or she would never say that. It took me 7 years and two trips to the CAVC (#12-1980 (comp.) and #15-115 (CUE)) to collect my $500,000. I had wonderful evidence but VA was adamant about not paying that huge sum out without a fight. When (and if) Navy4life becomes accredited and dips her paddle in the VA lake of claims, I do hope she'll come back and tell us you never have to appeal to the BVA or up to the Court. If we never had to, there would be no need for Attorneys or Agents (or VSOs for that matter!) and we would certainly never need the CAVC. We'd settle all this at the ROs across the fruited plains and win the first time out. Ne c'est pas? <<<PTSD is a different animal and any claim for PTSD has to have a diagnosis from a VA or contracted examiner for the VA when a PTSD claim is submitted.>>>> Hmmm. What's wrong with this statement? How is it anyone who has been previously denied for PTSD ever wins down the road like all of my clients? Every one of the Vets I've taken on was denied by a contracted VA examiner (VES/QTC) or a VA psychiatrist. By law, I cannot represent them until they get denied. I have never used a DBQ nor would I. Until I repped the gentleman above, I had never had any but combat Vets like Buck w/ CIBs or other combat medals. Actually, I take that back. I had a WW2 Marine Infantryman who was in the first wave a New Georgia and Okinawa. He lost for PTSD eight times. He was my first claim. I got him 30% and filed the NOD. We obtained a IMO from a private shrink and VA instantly granted 100% with no fight. He was 94. Understand one thing. VA, by operation of law, is forbidden to develop negative evidence against your claim. Their shrink can deny you based on lack of a stressor or because you have personality disorders . Once your rebut that, you reach equipoise. Equipoise gives you the benefit of the doubt. Ergo, you win. One thing I do not hand out is bogus advice. I'm not allow to by law. You folks are welcome to disagree with me but please do not ask me to agree with your interpretation of statute and regulation. I began this game in 1989. I finally won the last of it in 2016. You can insist I'm full of hooey and doing it wrong but my clients (over 1000 now) are all happy campers. In fact, everyone who read my book has gone on to win. If any of you are avid followers of the CAVC, check out docket #18-938. You will notice that Judge Bartley is taking an inordinately long time to deny my quest for a larger greenhouse after VR&E screwed me on the size. If they were going to deny or dismiss, it would have happened in less than a week. Next week, we'll be going over one month with no decision. I'm hoping for a panel and an Ex Writ win. That would be #9 in all of CAVC history since 1989. Win or Die.