add55p

Hello  Hamslice.
you will have to have a va.gov account in order to access the "Issues" tab.
Sign on to va.gov. next click on check(view) claims and appeals. after the screen opens and you have a pending appeall, you will see a "STATUS" and next to it will be the "ISSUES" tab.
Hope this helps.
Add

Andyman73

I definitely hear what you are saying!!!! I personally, was in that same struggle for VA benefits as you are referring to.

My claim was actually being (what I appear to be) ignored for about 2 years. Until I called the Office of case management 202 number, absolutely no movement and I mean no movement, on my claim. My Veteran Service office kept telling me that the 2 year wait time was normal and it could take up to 3-4 years..

After my VSO told me that, I decided that I had absolutely nothing to lose, and called the 202 number listed in this forum.

From then on, my claim received the appropriate attention that every claim should receive.

It is sad that I must consider myself lucky after being awarded compensation for my service connected disabilities. I believe that all of the upfront legal jargon that you get at the start of the claims process, makes you feel that it is a legal battle, rather than applying for what the government states as an earned entitlement..

Thanks for the reply..

To All,

Great replies. I was just wondering out loud. Maybe they saw something that I did not see.

Thank you..

Add

No!!!!! Personally, I think you are probably wrong and just don't realize it. Also, they could have found something you were unaware of, during a C&P, and rated it. jmo

pr

No. The VA has a very strict procedure for reductions, and must follow it to the letter or you can have that reversed upon appeal.
If its been over a year, the VA must establish the "Cue" standard, that is, the evidence must be undebatable that you dont qualify for the benefits.

Its even more difficult for the VA to reduce you if your benefits have been effective for at least 5 years, or you are P and T. They must show "actual improvement" under ordinary conditions of life.

The concept of "stare decisis" prohibits a new rater from looking at your evidence and saying, "gee this looks more like 10%, not 30% so I just will go ahead and reduce the Veteran to 10%".

Otherwise, a Veteran could just keep applying for benefits over and over again, until he found a Veteran friendly rater who would grant benefits. The law works both ways, stare decisis (finality of decisions after a year) can help the Veteran or hurt him. In your case, it should help prevent a reduction.

Of course, if you write to VA and tell them you only qualified for 10 percent and were awarded 30% in error, you can revoke your benefits. Benefits are not mandantory, and are paid to the Veteran only when he applies for same. He may elect to revoke his benefits at any time, and VA will gladly comply with this Veterans request.

Jbasser and ArNG11

I have not yet been rated. Still waiting.

Will let you know how it turns out.

Thank you for your input..

Add

The crazy one here. Yes I know this sound crazy but I love thinking outside the Box. This is how most of us got to the 100% group.

§ 3.156New and material evidence.
(a)General. A claimant may reopen a finally adjudicated claim by submitting new and material evidence. New evidence means existing evidence not previously submitted to agency decisionmakers. Material evidence means existing evidence that, by itself or when considered with previous evidence of record, relates to an unestablished fact necessary to substantiate the claim. New and material evidence can be neither cumulative nor redundant of the evidence of record at the time of the last prior final denial of the claim sought to be reopened, and must raise a reasonable possibility of substantiating the claim. (Authority: 38 U.S.C. 501, 5103A(f), 5108) (b)Pending claim. New and material evidence received prior to the expiration of the appeal period, or prior to the appellate decision if a timely appeal has been filed (including evidence received prior to an appellate decision and referred to the agency of original jurisdiction by the Board of Veterans Appeals without consideration in that decision in accordance with the provisions of § 20.1304(b)(1) of this chapter), will be considered as having been filed in connection with the claim which was pending at the beginning of the appeal period. (Authority: 38 U.S.C. 501) ©Service department records. (1) Notwithstanding any other section in this part, at any time after VA issues a decision on a claim, if VA receives or associates with the claims file relevant official service department records that existed and had not been associated with the claims file when VA first decided the claim, VA will reconsider the claim, notwithstanding paragraph (a) of this section. Such records include, but are not limited to: (i) Service records that are related to a claimed in-service event, injury, or disease, regardless of whether such records mention the veteran by name, as long as the other requirements of paragraph © of this section are met; (ii) Additional service records forwarded by the Department of Defense or the service department to VA any time after VA's original request for service records; and (iii) Declassified records that could not have been obtained because the records were classified when VA decided the claim. (2) Paragraph ©(1) of this section does not apply to records that VA could not have obtained when it decided the claim because the records did not exist when VA decided the claim, or because the claimant failed to provide sufficient information for VA to identify and obtain the records from the respective service department, the Joint Services Records Research Center, or from any other official source. (3) An award made based all or in part on the records identified by paragraph ©(1) of this section is effective on the date entitlement arose or the date VA received the previously decided claim, whichever is later, or such other date as may be authorized by the provisions of this part applicable to the previously decided claim. "(4) A retroactive evaluation of disability resulting from disease or injury subsequently service connected on the basis of the new evidence from the service department must be supported adequately by medical evidence. Where such records clearly support the assignment of a specific rating over a part or the entire period of time involved, a retroactive evaluation will be assigned accordingly, except as it may be affected by the filing date of the original claim." In reference to the original post, I am referring to when a veteran actually files a claim and the claim is denied and then the veteran actually file a reopen claim and the reopen claim is granted. The veteran should look at the evidence used listed on the denied rating decision and the evidence used listed on the granted rating decision. VA is famous for not reviewing the entire C-file. Their could be material evidence during the time of the original claim not used and not listed in the rating decision especially evidence like SMRs and VA Medical Treatment Records. If and I say if a veteran can prove that his/her condition existed and became established before the claim was denied in the original claim. Then the veteran should file an Earlier Effective Date for retro payment. If the evidence was in the file what does the veteran really have to lose but time.

Etiologically provides a stronger foundation for future claims for increase, as well. BOD implies a borderline decision where the evidence sits on the 50/50 teeter-totter. However, a win is a win.

I agree with Buck and with add55p. I could see where a VA rater might give a lower rating when the BVA finds the evidence is 50/50 and the veteran is given the benefit of the doubt, especially if the VA rater did not agree with the BVA opinion. JMO

GP

Both may be winners, 1st is a 50/50 where Vet gets the "Jump Ball," 2nd might actually be better when considering future Secondary or aggravation claims. But a WIN, clean or Dirty is still a Win. Which type of Decision would be easier for the VA to put up for reduction in the future, if either, I would lean towards "Jump Ball" Award.

Semper Fi

Gastone

Buck52

The way I read what you have posted regarding the etiologically decided claim, I to think that that would be more beneficial to the Veteran.

Theoretically, I believe the word "Doubt" may cause the rater to give a lower rating when a higher rating would be warranted.

This is just my opinion..

Thank you for your response..

Add

Buck52

The way I read what you have posted regarding the etiologically decided claim, I to think that that would be more beneficial to the Veteran.

Theoretically, I believe the word "Doubt" may cause the rater to give a lower rating when a higher rating would be warranted.

This is just my opinion..

Thank you for your response..

Add

"4.3 Resolution of reasonable doubt.
It is the defined and consistently applied policy of the Department of Veterans Affairs to administer the law under a broad interpretation, consistent, however, with the facts shown in every case. When after careful consideration of all procurable and assembled data, a reasonable doubt arises regarding the degree of disability such doubt will be resolved in favor of the claimant. See § 3.102 of this chapter.
[40 FR 42535, Sept. 15, 1975]" 38 CFR 4.3

Etiological Diagnosis
is a process of determining the nature and cause of the disease or injury through evaluation of the patient history exam & lab.

So I think no. 2 would be more beneficial to the veteran as for as related to service.


jmo


............Buck

Yes, its still there. Its called an "informal claim for increase" where a hospital exam can be an informal claim for benefits. But dont bet the farm VA will do this! 38 CFR 3.157:
https://www.law.cornell.edu/cfr/text/38/3.157

You know that sometimes you can use a hospital admission as the basis for an EED. I did this back in 2001. I think that regulation has not changed? It used to be that a hospital admission could be considered a claim for benefits. Did the VA change that rule recently? I think that was the basis of my original claim since I was admitted to the VA hospital in 1972 for two weeks and this was within one year of my discharge. I don't remember making a claim but I later got paperwork asking for more medical evidence on my claim for benefits. I took the form asking for a medical opinion with me to my doctor, but the VA ignored it anyway.

I agree with everyone above.

Secretary McDonald and Secretary Hickey have gone way out of there way to get long pending claims addressed immediately. I truly believe that because the way that the Veteran Affairs laws are written, in most cases, very ambiguous, they have their hand tied.

In some ways congress is part of the problem. For years, they have been having hearings on all sorts of Veterans Affairs issues, especially the claims backlog. But after the hearing and promises from past VA top officials that they would do better by the veteran, the same old hearing are just repeated.

The managers at the regional offices do not take an active role in the veterans claims until they are notified by higher ups (i.e. Secretary McDonald or Secretary Hickey). If the Regional Office Managers take the on hand approach as the two senior VA secretaries (accept Veterans email complaints directly and not through IRIS!!!), they would be able to identify the systemic problems at the respective agencies.

Secretary McDonald and Secretary Hickey should be commended for the progress that they have made to improve the Department of Veterans Affairs and regain the trust of the Veterans..

Add

I agree with everyone above.

Secretary McDonald and Secretary Hickey have gone way out of there way to get long pending claims addressed immediately. I truly believe that because the way that the Veteran Affairs laws are written, in most cases, very ambiguous, they have their hand tied.

In some ways congress is part of the problem. For years, they have been having hearings on all sorts of Veterans Affairs issues, especially the claims backlog. But after the hearing and promises from past VA top officials that they would do better by the veteran, the same old hearing are just repeated.

The managers at the regional offices do not take an active role in the veterans claims until they are notified by higher ups (i.e. Secretary McDonald or Secretary Hickey). If the Regional Office Managers take the on hand approach as the two senior VA secretaries (accept Veterans email complaints directly and not through IRIS!!!), they would be able to identify the systemic problems at the respective agencies.

Secretary McDonald and Secretary Hickey should be commended for the progress that they have made to improve the Department of Veterans Affairs and regain the trust of the Veterans..

Add

No. You should always get a decision, regardless of whether it contains a remand or not. Your decision will contain specifics on why its a remand, even if its a partial remand.

If you get a partial grant, too, there is a fast letter explaining that VA should go ahead and pay you for the award, and then you wait for the outcome of the remand. If you like you can appeal any denied portion.

You dont appeal any portions which are remanded..only those which are denied or awarded! (you can appeal the effective date, or disability percentage on an issue which has been awarded). You simply have to wait for any remanded portion, because it means you will have another decision coming after the remand is completed. Example:
Your issue #1 is granted upon appeal. Issue number 2 is remanded for a C and P exam as the board feels a C and P should be done as you dont have a valid nexus but have everything else. Issue number 3 is denied.

You will receive a decision spelling out the reasons and bases for each. You should get a regional office decision (supposedly soon) which implements the Board decision. It should pay you for issue 1, and list an effective date, explain they are working on the remand for issue 2, and that issue 3 is denied.

You may appeal 2 out of 3 issues:
1. You can appeal the effective date on issue one if you think the date is wrong. 3. You can appeal the denial of issue 3. However, you can not appeal issue 2 that is remanded until such time that the VARO orders a c and p exam and issues a new decision on item 2. If you dont like the outcome you can appeal that decision also, when it arrives.

1. The BVA decision would be closed when the decision was mailed to you, unless its a remand with instructions to send it back to BVA.

2. No. If its denied it does not go to AMC. Amc is mostly for remands.

3. 38 CFR 3.103 requires the Veteran receive written notice of a decision, regardless of the outcome, remand, award or denial. There should not be an instance you do not get a decision, (of course there are errors, usually when the VA does not have your current address).
4. Yes, you should get a copy of the remand, denial, or award in all cases.

Understand one decision can be denied, remanded, or awarded, or any combination of the 3, since you may have more than one issue. You could be denied one issue, remanded another, and awarded a third issue, like what happened to me. There is a fast letter concerning "partial grants" that says, to the effect, the VA has to pay you and can not delay a partial grant awaiting the outcome of the remand.

Im not sure you understand "waiver of RO consideration". This is so the Board can decide the claim if they feel compelled to do so. Otherwise, the board can not decide certain issues, and must remand it to the RO. It saves time. I always recommend you sign the waiver.

If the Secretary could make a difference, I would ask that he get the VA to list, specifically in Ebenefits, what evidence has been submitted.

As it stands now, Ebenefits states that evidence was received on a specific date, but does not state what was received,

There is no way to know if VA received specific pieces of critical evidence until a decision is made, and then it too late, You have to resubmit the missing evidence in the form of a notice of disagreement or reconsideration in order to get the evidence that you thought VA had, considered. Resubmission of the evidence will cause your claim to be further delayed one to two years while waiting on it to be reviewed by the respective VA adjudicator.

Add

If the Secretary could make a difference, I would ask that he get the VA to list, specifically in Ebenefits, what evidence has been submitted.

As it stands now, Ebenefits states that evidence was received on a specific date, but does not state what was received,

There is no way to know if VA received specific pieces of critical evidence until a decision is made, and then it too late, You have to resubmit the missing evidence in the form of a notice of disagreement or reconsideration in order to get the evidence that you thought VA had, considered. Resubmission of the evidence will cause your claim to be further delayed one to two years while waiting on it to be reviewed by the respective VA adjudicator.

Add