free_spirit_etc

I am so happy for you!

"Under 38 C.F.R. § 4.16(a), marginal employment shall not be considered substantially gainful employment. For purposes of this section, marginal employment generally shall be deemed to exist when a veteran's earned annual income does not exceed the amount established by the U.S. Department of Commerce, Bureau of the Census, as the poverty threshold for one person. Marginal employment may also be held to exist, on a facts found basis (includes but is not limited to employment in a protected environment such as a family business or sheltered workshop), when earned annual income exceeds the poverty threshold. Consideration shall be given in all claims to the nature of the employment and the reason for termination." So basically, they are saying that if your employment is considered marginal, it can't be considered substantial gainful. If your income is below poverty level - it SHALL be considered marginal. If your work is in a protected environment - it MAY be considered marginal. But if your TDUI was denied based on income alone - you should be able to appeal in that they didn't take the protected nature of your employment into consideration.

Is this a family business? Otherwise, making above poverty level income with only working 10 hours a week seems kind of high to be considered marginal employment.

"One devious trick is to deny one claim and fail to mention the others or to vaguely say they are still methodically plodding their way through them (deferred is a term often used). If a year goes by from the claim denied with no appeal of all three, VA will say they were "deemed denied" or you should have "inferred" they were denied because they were never mentioned again. " I have been learning a lot about this trick. And a problem is that there are many cases that cover this - and so the BVA will explain why the case you reference doesn't apply to YOUR case, and the case they pick out does. However, if they use the word "deferred" in discussing your claim -- then I think you have a strong case to argue the claim is still pending and unadjudicated. I think it would be hard for them to argue (and win) the idea that your claim was implicitly denied if you were told it was deferred. Just be very careful about them making ANY mention of that claim / condition AFTER they informed you it was deferred trying to sneakily implicitly deny it.

http://www.ssa.gov/cola/ "The purpose of the COLA is to ensure that the purchasing power of Social Security and Supplemental Security Income (SSI) benefits is not eroded by inflation. It is based on the percentage increase in the Consumer Price Index for Urban Wage Earners and Clerical Workers (CPI-W) from the third quarter of the last year a COLA was determined to the third quarter of the current year. The CPI-W is determined by the Bureau of Labor Statistics in the Department of Labor. By law, it is the official measure used by the Social Security Administration to calculate COLAs."

To allow some and not others would be discrimination... Actually, it seems like to categorically deny an entire category of people just because they might not be able to handle the special needs of certain members of the group on certain flights seems to be more discriminatory...

Sierra, If you have a new doctor, could you just get the new doctor to change the designation back to unknown? I am by no means trying to diminish your frustration that your records were changed and no one can provide you with a resolution. But if you could get the new doctor to change the designation back to what it was, at least you would have that much accomplished while you fought the rest of it.

63Sierra, Have you applied for SSI for your autistic child?

Even if the RO is open, it doesn't necessarily mean they are working on your specific claim. I don't see a week or two delay to make a huge difference in the big picture. Maybe I am missing something. My husband's initial claim went all the way to the BVA. The BVA remanded because they said they didn't see a copy of the DD214 in the file. So my husband had to wait another year for the RO to put that in the file AGAIN and send it back to the BVA. So I just don't see a week or two making a huge difference in how quickly the VA processes claims. They can take a long time, even when they are open for business.

From what I have read, they are working on claims. Actually, there are several threads here on hadit where people are discussing the very same topic that gives a lot more information about it. Try this one:

I read somewhere that using the Healthevet system can be useful for documenting symptoms - and that anything the veteran puts on there becomes part of their medical history. I don't know much about it - but you might want to check it out. It could be useful to show reporting of symptoms.

If he noted 4 to 5 a day that is good. You should be able to appeal for a higher rating based on that. I can't see how anyone could consider 4 to 5 episodes a day to be occasional.

"Why are these considered lay statements and not medical opinions?" Because if they distort the information and the veteran doesn't catch it the veteran gives up and quits pursuing the claim.

here are some cases that discuss that: http://www.ptsdlawyers.com/blog/2013/03/reasonably-raised-by-the-record.shtml The law requires the VA to "give a sympathetic reading to the veteran's filings by 'determining all potential claims raised by the evidence, applying all relevant laws and regulations.'" Szemraj v. Principi, 357 F.3d 1370, 1373 (Fed. Cir.2004) (quoting Roberson v. Principi, 251 F.3d 1378, 1384 (Fed. Cir. 2001) (emphasis added)). Moreover, "the Board is required to adjudicate all issues reasonably raised by a liberal reading of the appellant's substantive appeal, including all documents and oral testimony in the record prior to the Board's decision." Brannon v. West, 12 Vet. App. 32, 34 (1998); see also Solomon v. Brown, 6 Vet. App. 396 (1994). The Board may not ignore or disregard an issue merely because the veteran did not expressly raise the appropriate legal provision which corresponds to the benefits sought. Fanning v. Brown, 4 Vet. App. 225, 229 (1993); Akles v. Derwinski, 1 Vet. App. 118, 121 (1991). Where a VA regulation is made potentially applicable through the assertions and issues raised in the record, the Board's refusal to acknowledge and consider that regulation is "arbitrary, capricious, an abuse of discretion, not in accordance with the law," and must be set aside as such. 38 U.S.C. § 7061(a)(3). Lind v. Shinseki, 06-3637, 2009 WL 159221 (Vet. App. Jan. 23, 2009). While the law requires VA to give a sympathetic reading to a veteran's filings by determining all potential claims raised by the evidence, and applying all relevant laws and regulations, nevertheless, it is well settled there must be: 1) an intent to apply for benefits, whether formal or informal; and 2) the intent must be communicated in writing. Criswell v. Nicholson, 20 Vet. App. 501 (2006) (citing MacPhee v. Nicholson, 459 F.3d 1323, 1326-27 (Fed. Cir. 2006)).

Ditto!

Thanks jbasser. It wouldn't let me leave the SC Disability blank. But I added widow under interests. It doesn't quite seem like an interest. But at least I was able to note that.to more properly identify myself.

I have a question about changing my profile. I think once upon a time I left the section on Service Connected Disability blank. But the last time I changed something it required that I enter something in that space. It won't let me put widow there. It says correct answers are None or 0 - 100%. I tried again tonight to put Widow and it won't accept that answer. Is there any way to change that?

I have no disability and I am not a veteran. I am a veteran's widow. I came to the conclusion that VSOs are often (not always) an additional aggravation based on my own experience with my VSO and frustrations other vets have reported concerning their VSOs. It is admirable that you invest so much time in filing the veterans' claims. Not all VSOs do so. Perhaps you even have the time to go over every record and every decision with a fine-tooth comb. Not every VSO does so. Based on the threads I have read here of people realizing they were totally screwed over on previous claims when they finally read through their records (despite the fact that they had VSOs), I would say that completely relying on a VSO, instead of keeping on top of your own claim, is not always a wise decision. It is great that you have had few complaints in your 7 1/2 years as a VSO. As I stated, there are some good VSOs out there. But based on the complaints about VSOs I have read on hadit and other forums, I would still say that there are some not so good ones out there. And I don't believe that all of the complaints I have read are from people who think they don't have to follow the same procedures as everyone else. Nor do I believe that I don't have to follow the same procedures as everybody else. And yes, some some VSOs are even an additional aggravation. Free - not disabled, but the widow of a veteran who was disabled (to the point he is now dead) who thinks that entitles her to have an opinion (just like everybody else).

I am certainly not an expert on this. I know I have read in here that for PTSD claims the VA must be the ones that diagnose it. Being a combat vet, you shouldn't have too much trouble proving your "stressor." Here is an examination form for things they look for: http://www.vba.va.gov/pubs/forms/VBA-21-0960P-3-ARE.pdf

You want to make sure your statements stick to the facts, and just report what they have observed themselves, and not draw inferences.. Even if someone didn't witness the stressor, if someone could state that your behavior was different at that time or something - that would add credence to your report that X happened. But keep in mind that the farther back in time you go, the less likely someone would remember all the details. So a bunch of reports that you acted different on such and such day a long time ago would not be considered too credible. BUT if someone could tie it in to a specific incident that they would remember, it would be more credible. For instance, X, who is usually upbeat and talkative was really short-tempered and X on X day. I remember this specifically because it was my birthday and I called him and I was really upset that he yelled at me... << that would be more credible for remembering a specific incident on a specific date a long time ago. If they don't remember a specific date, even a general time-frame might help. And if you are also going to try to establish a basis for anxiety, depression, or some other mental issue (especially if you can't specifically prove your specific stressor) then statements about changes in your behavior, attitude, demeanor during the time you were in the military could be helpful - with specific examples of how (and generally when they noticed) those things changed. Also -- anything showing continuity of symptoms - especially from the time you got out of service until the time you started getting treatment might help. http://www.va.gov/vetapp00/files1/0001569.txt As a general matter, in order for any testimony to be probative of any fact, the witness must be competent to testify as to the facts under consideration. See Espiritu, supra; Layno v. Brown, 6 Vet. App. 465 (1994). A witness must have personal knowledge in order to be competent to testify to a matter. Competent testimony is thus limited to that which the witness has actually observed, i.e., to that which is within the realm of his personal knowledge as distinguished from opinions or conclusions drawn from such facts. So make sure they stick to things they observed and things they know for a fact. And each statement alone doesn't have to totally prove anything. But the statements from other people when all considered together might help prove your case.

Ken, Do you have a VSO or attorney? Or are you representing yourself? I recently had a hearing in DC. I planned on representing myself - and presenting my argument (which I had already written). But I ended up appointing a VSO at the last minute - which upset the whole apple cart. I found the judge to be very nice. He asked a few questions and was nice and respectful. I found him to be much more respectful and supportive than my VSO. I am assuming that if I had not appointed a VSO, the judge would have let me present my argument. Actually, even with my VSO, the judge would have probably let me present my argument. But my VSO was rather useless, asked a lot of irrelevant questions, and kept rolling his eyes at my answers. GRRRR. I think the majority of VSOs are a bit more useful than that - and they would usually present your argument to the judge. I read that the judges hearing notes and the transcript of the hearing are very important information when the attorney starts drafting the decision. (Yep. Asknod let me know it isn't the judge that actually drafts the decision.) So you want to make sure you have presented your case well enough that the transcript and hearing notes will support your claims. There is an interesting guide to Board Hearings here: http://www.iacvac.org/PP/ceu7.pdf

Do you have a diagnosis of PTSD yet? And yes, it is very "doable" to do a claim on your own. In fact, if you use a VSO, you need to do all the leg work, follow up to make sure they have done their part, and double check any advice they give you. So they are often just an additional aggravation. There are some good ones out there. But... even the good ones are so dang busy they don't have a lot of time to spend on each claim.

Oh... sorry he had to settle for second best and didn't get in the Air Force...

Maybe you could use a commode and save it for them to weigh each week... I might not even be right on the estimate -- I was just guessing based on the way these three seem to line up with each other. I would think that every day should be either frequent or constant. [X] Episodes of bowel disturbance with abdominal distress If checked, indicate frequency: [X] Occasional episodes [ ] Frequent episodes [ ] More or less constant abdominal distress 7319 Irritable colon syndrome (spastic colitis, mucous colitis, etc.): Severe; diarrhea, or alternating diarrhea and constipation, with more or less constant abdominal distress..................................................................... 30 Moderate; frequent episodes of bowel disturbance with abdominal distress................................................................................................................ 10 Mild, disturbances of bowel function with occasional episodes of abdominal distress................................................................................................ 0

Maybe you can put in for increased rating...