free_spirit_etc

Did your VSO make any arguments? I really think your chances look good - based on how they wrote the remand. They already said you presented competent evidence of the injuries. Even if the diagnosis is different, it is the same symptoms. And the record does show symptoms since service? right after service?

What he said!

Have you tried claiming for anxiety and depression to included PTSD?

Since the attorneys write the decisions, I wonder if your case is assigned to the same attorney when it returns from a remand. That would be a good thing. Did the C&P examiners give any more likely than not statements? What was their reasoning?

I think you can blow right past the RO saying the conditions are not service connected because they were not diagnosed until after service...especially if the BVA has already pointed out "The Veteran has provided competent reports that these disabilities began after carrying heavy loads while participating in combat missions as well as being hit by an explosion in Iraq" Is it possible for you to post the remand, decision and the C&P reports? You might be able to actually use the C&P report to support your claim -- and claim more conditions. If the only basis they have for saying it isn't SC is when it was diagnosed, a good IMO will take care of that.

If the BVA remand points out that you showed your symptoms started long ago - and pointed out you had competent evidence of that the disability started when you carried heavy loads and were hit in an explosion - that is a good sign. There isn't really any law or statute to keep them from changing the diagnosis. Actually, you might even want to consider using that to your advantage, if you can. You might have several separate disabilities, (some of them being secondary) from the same injury. Maybe your doctor could even agree with the other diagnoses, and connect them ALL to the heavy loads and explosion. It would be hard for the VA to say you did not have the other conditions. They diagnosed you with them. If your doctor connects the dots - the game might just turn on them.

Personally, I think having a mental "melt down" might be evidence that your anxiety is somewhat disabling. Did they say on what basis they want to reduce you?

Bevo - Do you have an IMO pointing out that the previous symptoms were manifestations of the current condition? It is likely they will want to say it is something different, unless someone (i.e. a doctor) points out that the symptoms that were thought to be X in 19XX were actually related to the current disability - and tying the service injury into the current condition?

Wishing you much luck WMS!

Hey It is fine with me! That's what the site is about - asking and answering questions that help Vets (and their dependents and survivors). Sometimes it is hard to keep the threads "tidy" because discussions end up going where they go. Sometimes you don't know whether to start a new thread or not. It is a difficult call at times.

I started a new thread concerning VA (and other Federal Agency) Direct Deposits. So this thread can get back on track. But I always get nervous when people say that the VA cannot take money from other accounts a survivor has in the bank. I don't have an overwhelming need to "be right" on this issue. And I realize that just because my funds were taken doesn't mean that will happen in every case. But I do think survivors should be educated that there IS a possibility that can happen and plan accordingly. I do know it can happen. And I do know it takes a LONG time to get the issue resolved. Personally, I think it is wiser planning for a survivor to count on it occurring than not count on it occurring. In my case, it wasn't life threatening because I had other income and the amount was not substantial. But the widow is entitled to the month of death payment from the VA, which is actually paid the month AFTER the veteran's death. But the VA is not always good about releasing that payment. They might not reclaim the funds. They might reclaim the funds and pay her the month of death payment fairly quickly. But they might do, as they did in my case, freeze the funds in another account where she can't spend them, but refuse to send her the payment as they have not reclaimed the funds -- and then take a LONG time to pay once the funds have been reclaimed. Regardless of WHO froze my funds, they were frozen. We have lots of Vets in here with spouses. I think it is wise to be adequately informed of the potential problems and plan accordingly. Whomever wants to believe that the VA can only touch funds in that one account -- that is fine. But whomever wants to consider the possibility that the VA, the bank, or someone can mess with any funds on deposit at the same bank should be forewarned.

Rule Book regarding Direct Deposits from the VA, Social Security, and other Federal Agencies. http://fms.treas.gov/greenbook/index.html Guide to Federal ACH Payments "FMS periodically reviews the Green Book and plans for future updates. In particular, FMS plans to add a new Garnishment chapter and update Chapter 5 on Reclamations pending decisions regarding an automated ACH reclamations process. To make the Green Book easier to navigate and to facilitate downloading and printing, chapters are available in PDF format only."

There is a lot of interesting information in the Greenbook http://fms.treas.gov/greenbook/pdf/Green-Book-Chapter-5-May-2013.pdf "Section 2: Liability of a Receiving Depository Financial Institution (RDFI) A. Full Liability An RDFI is liable for ALL benefit payments received after the death or legal incapacity of a recipient or death of a beneficiary; unless the RDFI meets the qualifications for limiting its liability (see B. Limiting Liability below). If the RDFI fails to meet the qualifications for limiting its liability, the RDFI will be heldliable for all post-death payments received after the death or legal incapacity of a recipient or death of a beneficiary. The RDFI will be debited for the full amount of the reclamation;this debit action will be final." "B. Limiting Liability An RDFI may qualify to limit its liability if it: • certifies it did not have actual or constructive knowledge* of the recipient’s death or incapacity at the time of the deposit of any post-death benefit payments; • returns all post-death benefit payments it receives after it learns of the death; and • responds to the Notice of Reclamation (FMS-133), completely and adequately, so that it is received by the Government Disbursing Office within 60 days from the date of the notice." "C. Calculating the Limited Liability Amount If an RDFI qualifies for limited liability, the RDFI will only be debited for the 45-day amount. The 45-day amount is the dollar amount of the post-death benefit payments received within 45 calendar days following the death." "What to do upon Notification of Death with Payments Already Posted and Subsequent Payments When an RDFI receives actual or constructive knowledge of the death, it does not have to wait for a Notice of Reclamation. The RDFI can immediately return all subsequent post death benefit payments to the Government Disbursing Office. The RDFI must also notify the sending agency of the recipient’s death. An ACH return using return reason code R15 or R14 constitutes proper notification to the Federal agency."

I agree this thread is moving all different directions. It has moved in the direction the discussion took it. I am not sure that the bank was wrong. The bank has an agreement with the Federal Government. And I had agreement with the bank. What the bank told me was that my agreement with them allowed them to access ANY funds I had at the bank for money owed. From what I am finding, in cases where the veteran died if the bank receives money AFTER they (the bank) have knowledge of the death, then THEY (the bank) is liable for the funds. The bank is actually supposed to return the funds, without the VA even having to start a reclamation process. If they don't return the funds, the bank is liable. I see the instructions state " Note: If at the time the RDFI first receives information of death, all or part of the post-death benefit payments have already been withdrawn from the account, the government does not authorize the RDFI to try to recover the funds from the withdrawer. If the RDFI does so, it acts under its own authority in terms of its contract with its depositor or under state law." -- So the VA is not authorizing the bank to collect the funds from the person who withdrew them or spent them (i.e. the Federal Government isn't liable) - but they might be able to do so under state law or their contract with the depositor. This could be very interesting as far as the case we have been discussing - because from what I am reading, the BANK is actually liable for accepting the payments after they have knowledge of the veteran's death. So depending on the widow's state law, or her contract with the bank, she could possibly withdraw the funds and the bank would have to repay them. So I would suggest she talk to an attorney. As far as her withdrawing the money and having NO funds left at the bank - it is possible that the bank would not be able to collect it from her (depending on the state law), though the bank may very well try to put a negative mark on her ChexSystem report. But most banks include in their agreements with depositors that if you owe the bank any funds they can take them from ANY account you have on deposit. So though it may seem like if you move funds out of THAT account the funds will be safe - as long as you have ANY funds on deposit with the bank the funds went into, they can take them from any account (depending on the depositor agreement and state law). http://www.bankersonline.com/operations/guru2008/gurus_op042808e.html http://fms.treas.gov/greenbook/index.html http://fms.treas.gov/greenbook/pdf/Green-Book-Chapter-5-May-2013.pdf

Proudvet, I am sorry - I don't know that. But I hope you don't have to wait long. GRRR at the VA doctor that told you they don't pay for headaches. Headaches can be a symptom of something they do pay for.

bigdave, It most likely depends on how they write it up. The VA doctor could either say it is related or it isn't related. It would certainly be possible to build a case that it is related. http://www.eorthopod.com/content/carpal-tunnel-syndrome-as-a-complication-of-wrist-fracture Keep in mind a lot of private doctors don't want to get involved in VA claims and / or don't understand the process. Or they think you would have to absolutely prove that is the cause. The VA standard of proof is "at least as likely as not." So they don't have to know for sure that caused it. They just have to be able to say it is more likely than not, or at least as likely as not. Good luck!

The check from them that is hers could be DIC then. If they started paying her DIC and still kept paying his full benefits - they have messed up big time. But her check could also be survivors benefits through his military retirement pay (through DFAS).

Since I have two IMOs (including the one mentioned) that state his cancer started in service -- would even a letter that was pretty basic but clarified that if my husband had reported fatigue in 1998 - 1999 that it is at least as likely than not that the fatigue could be related to his cancer (even if it also had other causes..) be helpful? (especially if he cited a study or two)? Or would I need to go the whole way and have him go over all the records on fatigue and discuss all the possible causes, and pretty much write up a whole IMO about fatigue and cancer? I think I have a pretty strong case - just with that the cancer had its onset in service. Most of the BVA claims I have read that are similar are granted on that basis. Occasionally, the IMOS (and decisions) mention something to the effect that if someone would have examined the veteran's X on a cell by cell basis, they would have found cancer, at least on a microscopic level (which covers the claim if they want to be more specific on that it was "manifest.") I should have that covered with the other doctor's statement that based on the size of my husband's tumor in 2000, they would have detected it before his retirement if they had used an instrument more sensitive than a chest x-ray. (He had a chest x-ray 2 years before he retired). But the fatigue symptom could also be considered a manifestation - if the doctor considered it to be a symptom of his lung cancer (at least as likely as not).

Thanks PR. I agree the statement says I reported to him my husband reported fatigue. But my husband actually reported fatigue to the VA upon his discharge. But he thought it was from GWI. He retired in 1998 and the Fatigue C&P exam was in April 1999. They just said he did not meet the standard of CFS, but didn't attribute his fatigue to anything. He was re-evaluated in 2003, and at that time they said he had CFS, but attributed it his "depression." They had to figure out a diagnosis, since they didn't want to leave it hang as an undiagnosed illness - so they had a Mental C&P. They gave him the Beck Depression Inventory, and he marked: Feeling no real satisfaction Loss of interest Feeling unattractive Difficulty making decisions Needing to push hard to accomplish things Tiring easily Basically, he was fatigued, and so he marked all the things that said he was fatigued (tired all the time, loss of interest, needing to push harder, etc.) So they diagnosed him with depression -- and said his depression was the cause for fatigue. It seems kind of like circular reasoning to me. By 2003, he had lung cancer, emphysema, interstitial lung disease, arthritis, and sleep apnea -- and they decided he was tired all the time because he was depressed. because he marked that he was tired, had to push, etc. on the BDI. It was even odd that they went ahead and diagnosed his fatigue as secondary to depression AND noted that he was scheduled for a sleep study the following day (which showed he had a 37% sleep efficiency). So there were probably lots of causes for his fatigue, besides "depression" -- but he definitely complained of fatigue to the VA when he retired, and was evaluated for it within his presumptive period. You would have to meet the standards of CFS to be diagnosed with CFS, but you wouldn't necessarily need to have that level of fatigue for your fatigue to be a manifestation of another disease.

This is actually from one of my IMOs "The 100 or so pages of records that I have reviewed clearly show that he was separated from the US Air Force on 9/30/98 at a time when he manifested no symptoms from his left lower lobe lung cancer (although Ms XXXXX has indicated that he complained of fatigue at the time of his discharge which can be a prominent symptoms of lung cancer). A chest x-ray done on 6/24/96 was read as unremarkable. A physical exam performed at the time of his separation from the service cannot be found at this time." Does it sound like he is saying that my husband's reported fatigue could be related to his cancer? I actually think that he is saying that he manifested no symptoms -- but that he reported fatigue and that could be a symptom. (i.e. he manifested no apparent symptoms expect for possibly fatigue). But since he stated it the way he did -- especially with parenthesize - the VA could also take it to mean - He manifested no symptoms - and even though he reported fatigue, and fatigue is a prominent symptom of lung cancer (i.e. he did not manifest any symptoms) I am wondering about that before I start finalizing my argument. I also wonder if I should write and ask him to clarify the statement -- and see about adding an addendum to his IMO that expands on the fatigue a bit.

Hoping your bank account grows soon.

http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/38/503 38 USC § 503 - Administrative error; equitable relief (a) If the Secretary determines that benefits administered by the Department have not been provided by reason of administrative error on the part of the Federal Government or any of its employees, the Secretary may provide such relief on account of such error as the Secretary determines equitable, including the payment of moneys to any person whom the Secretary determines is equitably entitled to such moneys. (b) If the Secretary determines that a veteran, surviving spouse, child of a veteran, or other person has suffered loss as a consequence of reliance upon a determination by the Department of eligibility or entitlement to benefits, without knowledge that it was erroneously made, the Secretary may provide such relief on account of such error as the Secretary determines is equitable, including the payment of moneys to any person whom the Secretary determines is equitably entitled to such moneys.

The key is to move them to another bank, or a safe deposit box. But they can freeze the funds of ANY money you have at that bank. That is what happened to me. I had closed the joint account a few months after my husband died and reopened an individual account in my name. The funds from the joint account (where the VA funds were deposited) were spent -- most of it on my husband's funeral. The money in the individual account was MY money -- actually money that was from my husband's life insurance. The VA didn't even try to reclaim the funds for quite awhile. They just froze them to keep me from spending them in case they decided they wanted them back. The VA didn't notify me. The bank didn't notify me. I just noticed one day that I had less funds available than the funds on deposit. I had to call and visit the bank and no one could tell me why. Then they finally discovered that the VA put a freeze on the funds. Since the funds were no longer in our joint account (that was closed) the bank said they put the freeze on the funds on my individual account. It didn't matter if those funds were from the VA or not. What mattered is that I had been on the joint account, and I had an account at the bank with funds in it and they froze that. So you can move VA money out of the bank -- but if you still have money that was not from the VA at the same bank - they will freeze that money. And once they freeze the money -- they aren't in any hurry to get it resolved -- because they know you can't spend it.

You can look up some of the similar BVA cases (use Search Decisions)http://www.index.va.gov/search/va/bva.html And find cases like this: http://www.va.gov/vetapp13/Files1/1309350.txt and start to see the pattern of evidence and reasoning they use in these cases. If the condition is just from repeated stress or trauma from the job - then the VA is probably going to say that: 1. It was caused by the civilian portion or 2. The amount of stress from the civilian portion was greater and so the active duty portion didn't matter (or aggravate it beyond what it would have been). Of course, an IMO could always argue that ALL the stress and trauma contributed, it you can't effectively separate out civilian from active duty trauma -- and therefore the active duty trauma contributed (i.e. was service connected). That would probably take going all the way to the BVA -- with a good IMO - IF he has some supporting documentation in the SMRS An in service injury would be different. If he pulls any muscles, strains anything, starts experiencing pain while on active duty - then he really should get it documented (and treated) AND get it noted (and treated) if it keeps hurting. So many folks have to fight to show something was chronic because they got treatment one time and then just put up with the pain until they couldn't put up with it anymore.

mrush, What are your SC conditions?