lotzaspotz

If the Committee is interested in my husband's case, they would most likely be ready to hear from any veteran similarly affected. Just a side note also that the veteran who owns the misfiled medical records may also have grounds for a HIPAA complaint against the VA, if they knew their confidential medical records had been sent to someone else without permission. It's particularly egregious because these are two women, obviously not my husband, and one of the records discusses a breast cancer diagnosis.

That's exactly the reason we haven't forwarded the misfiled documents to the Committee. Now that we've acknowledged that the documents don't belong to my husband, I thought we'd suffer legal liability for sharing the information with any outside party without a subpoena. Whether or not the Committee actually ends up doing anything about this, we've made our point with the CAVC. We're still waiting for a correct and complete RBA to be sent to us, and hopefully we've done some good in taking a chunk out of the statute which supports the Presumption of Regularity.

We've filed a dispute with the RBA the Board provided to the CAVC on a pro se appeal we filed. Not only did we find two medical records (including social security numbers) belonging to two women in my husband's claims file, but also many instances of nothing but black scanned pages and pages that we couldn't read because they didn't feed into the scanner properly. Finally, we noticed an IMO missing that we provided to the Board prior to its denying the appeal which was sent and proven received via certified mail. The claims file numbered over 7,600 pages. So we filed the dispute and notified the House Veterans Affairs Committee. I was assured that they are very interested in the fact that confidential medical records are being misfiled and then copied and sent to the wrong veterans as part of their RBA, which of course, destroys the Presumption of Regularity the VA hides behind when they forget to notify veterans of exams, send notices to the wrong address, lose evidence the veteran has sent in, etc.. The Committee is in the process of deciding how to best handle this and told us they'd get back to us.

Armyrob was discussing how to best go about submitting your rebuttal to the SOC once you get it, so my apologies for not recognizing that this was somehow straying off topic. I address what I consider to be misinformation when and where I see it (let's just agree to disagree). You are in charge of all that, of course. Maybe they're more capable of keeping track of stuff in Texas than they are in Louisiana. Good luck with your appeal.

You can call the BVA and ask them. It's quite possible that it went to the Appeals Management Center, as well. The CAVC seldom reverses a BVA decision outright, so a remand is a good thing. You get to provide new evidence if you want to and live to fight another day. I've got a claim in that's been BVA remanded three times between 2011 - 2015, and is now pending at the BVA --again. The RO refuses to follow the BVA's directives on a claim filed with the RO in 1995 that they didn't give us a denial on until 2009, believe it or not (there's a story behind that for another day). I bet if the CAVC ends up getting that one, it will provide them with some interesting reading.

The challenge here is finding out if the VLJ who signed the decision is on the list. However, the lawyers on staff who actually write the decisions and submit them to the VLJ's for approval and/or changes remain unidentified in that their names are nowhere to be found on the decision. So, if they had anything to do with the denial and are on the list, the veteran would never know it. I'm guessing the VA will move heaven and earth to keep that information secret.

Regarding certified mail, I've successfully used it many times over the last 21 years to support an argument for an earlier effective date for a claim and to prove submissions after the RO claimed to have never received documents or to have received them on a date months later than when I actually submitted them. I have NEVER had to argue what was actually in the envelope. If anyone here has had that personally happen to them, I'd certainly like to hear it, otherwise, the advice not to use that method is based on hearsay and therefore merely anecdotal. There have been so many hiccups with the ebenefits program that I feel safer using certified mail, UPS, or Fedex. Another way is to submit the information through the local office of a U.S. Senator or Congressman, which I've also done. Berta suggested that several years ago and it works very well, especially if you're dealing with a particularly difficult situation and you can't get the RO's attention on your own. Trips to the RO to personally deliver your documents often involve many hours one way, and not all veterans are in good enough shape to withstand the trip.

There is no cure or treatment to eradicate tinnitus. Also, there is no objective test to diagnose tinnitus. You'll read in cut and paste macro statements wordage in Rating Decisions that implies such a thing exists, but it does not. It's pretty much your word for it.

If you suffer from tinnitus, you should claim it. It's a separate claim from hearing loss. Every little bit helps. On days when it's particularly loud and annoying, you'll wish you did.

If you supply additional evidence, the RO will then be obligated to issue a Supplemental Statement of the Case (SSOC) which should address the additional evidence.

Yes, that's normal. The Board remanded it for reasons addressed in the decision. This is also your opportunity to provide any additional evidence that may exist, like a doctor's medical opinion. You may also be called in for a C&P exam, for instance. Once the Board receives the information it needs, you'll receive a decision. If it's a denial or you disagree with the percentage awarded and/or the effective date, the DAV can't represent you if you appeal a Board denial to the Court of Veterans Appeals. You'll need an attorney or licensed agent authorized to practice before the CAVC.

Time to get your Congressional representatives involved. Send a letter to the WACO RO via certified mail, and if possible, deliver copies to the local offices of your Congressional reps, asking for an appointment to review your files in person. Get them involved, they can launch inquiries from their offices and put some heat on the RO. You'll be waiting for your records a very, very long time if you depend solely on an FOIA request.

My husband was rated 30% for bilateral cataracts caused by long-term steroid treatment of a service connected disability. Obstructive sleep apnea was also service connected for the same reason. Posterior Subcapsular Cataracts are commonly linked to steroid use. This is a textbook example of the need to be familiar with the effects of meds prescribed for service connected disabilities that lead to other disabilities that also warrant service connection.

VA lawyers only get paid if you do. There's no issue about your ability to afford it. They are either paid through a percentage of your retro award, normally not to exceed 20% of retro, or if a result of a Court of Veterans Appeals remand (where this claim may very well be headed and you'll do well to have a lawyer rep you because the DAV is not allowed), the government pays them. I think it's more a question of whether you can afford to keep doing what evidently no longer works for you.

My husband is rated for organic mental syndrome resulting from a pituitary tumor. Although not equivalent to TBI, it does impair one 's awareness and ability to function as far as short term memory is concerned. You can research cases yourself at the CAVC based on the following two statutes I'm using in my arguments: 38 CFR 3.156(c)(4) regarding evidence contained in service department records that were not considered or properly weighed, and 38 CFR 3.159(a)(1) which defines competent medical evidence, that is, the fact that veterans are not as a rule qualified to diagnose themselves. The VA likes to use that statute against veterans, but there are instances when it can work in favor of veterans if the VA expects you to diagnose your illness or injury in clinically exact terms when you file a claim. The right direction is a case search at the CAVC.

What is your attorney's opinion of the CUE potential regarding the effective date? Does he support it and if so, is he willing to represent the CUE? I've won and lost CUE's, in fact, I've got one currently pending at the CAVC. No attorney on those, but there is attorney representation on non-CUE's. You can't have more than one attorney on board, so the only option otherwise is to go the pro se route. My opinion is to file for as early an effective date as can be credibly argued and supported by evidence within the confines of the statutes covering CUE's. Compare your situation to the prerequisites of CUE and frame your argument accordingly. If you end up representing yourself on your CUE, you'll need to read everything you can get your hands on about CUE.

If you're thinking of filing an appeal based on CUE, you will have a difficult time finding an attorney to handle it. They normally decline those cases. Be ready to handle that one on your own if it comes to that.

This is an interesting article on a possible connection between depression and heart disease, but you would need a nexus letter from your physician linking YOUR heart condition specifically to your depression. Of course, you would also have to file a claim for depression, as previously discussed. There are several clinical benchmarks listed, this is not merely a theoretical discussion. http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2013/02/130219121604.htm

There's been a lot of discussion here on hadit about the fact that there is no such thing as a reconsideration request process without new and material evidence provided after the initial denial. When you file your formal Notice of Disagreement with the Rating Decision, that in and of itself is supposed to trigger a review of the denial, that is, a reconsideration, especially if you provide new and material evidence not previously submitted, or -- and this is very important-- evidence that was submitted was never adequately addressed and rebutted by the Regional Office in its Rating Decision letter to you. You can wave the red flag on that, as well, because that has the potential to convince the RO to reconsider the denial. That's why you have to make sure the evidence listed in the Rating Decision includes everything they had in their possession at the time, and also that it was actually weighed and to what extent under reasons and bases. Scrutinize the Statement of the Case letter you get after you file your NOD for the same reasons. But to my understanding, an NOD accomplishes the same purpose as a reconsideration request, without exposing the veteran to the possible loss of the veteran's NOD rights by letting the clock run out on that one year appeal deadline. Berta's right, the only thing waiting around for a response to your "reconsideration request" does is eat up time taken from the one year deadline from the decision date to file your Notice of Disagreement. Any VSO who doesn't tell you that is doing you a disservice.

There has to be a connection between your disabilities and your military service for rating purposes. The fact that the VA is treating you for illnesses does not necessarily make them service connected. The hearing problem is rated, as is tinnitus, but the others are not. In fact, I'm surprised that the VA rated that, normally, they would have blamed that disability on your law enforcement career in the years following your separation from the military, especially if it involved firearms. Obviously, I'm not a doctor, but I see quite a stretch to the argument that there's any relationship between hearing loss and your other issues, with the exception of depression. AO exposure is necessary to presumptively link your cardiac problems and diabetes to your service, that's why we asked about it. The timeline of your service aligned with the Vietnam era. Hopefully I'm understanding your question. If you confine yourself to your home because of your hearing problems for any substantial period on a regular basis, you're essentially housebound.

In my opinion, for starters, you have an obvious claim for depression secondary to your hearing loss. That should be effective the date you were prescribed treatment at Overton Brooks VAMC. You can go there (or mail a form downloaded from online) and fill out a request for your medical records, asking for the entire contents, including but not limited to clinical notes, progress notes, narrative summaries, operation reports, X-rays, CT scans, electronic records, handwritten records. If you've seen any private healthcare providers for any reason, you should request your records from them. Get your surgery records from LSUMC. Go to this website to request your service medical records and your service personnel records: https://www.archives.gov/st-louis/military-personnel/about-ompfs.html You should also request a copy of your claims file from the VA in New Orleans. More info here: http://www.nolo.com/legal-encyclopedia/how-obtain-your-va-records.html As georgiapapa said, even though you may not have been directly exposed to AO, any ship you stepped foot on might have, and that would be secondary exposure. Berta knows a lot about cardiac issues, I do not. Her question about whether the VA has ever rated your heart issues/stroke as non-service connected is also important, but I'm thinking if they did, you would have already mentioned it. What I'm hearing is that you may have an issue with your cardiac treatment at the VAMC to have let it progress to the point it did, and then be scheduled for surgery that endangered you needlessly, but again, I am not a doctor. Once you get your medical records from VAMC, LSUMC, and anywhere else you received treatment, you'll need someone impartial to review them. Dr. Tommy Brown is an excellent cardiologist in Shreveport who founded the Arklatex Cardiology Institute at Willis Knighton Medical System, http://www.arklatexcardio.com/indexa.html I don't know if Dr. Brown does IMO's or what he charges if he does, but if you're open to that, call and ask. If that doesn't work, call the heart surgeon at LSUMC who did your surgery. Anyone who does an independent medical opinion for you needs to personally examine you to make the IMO credible in the VA's eyes. Also to Gastone's point, if you are substantially housebound because you can't hear enough to drive or go out in public by yourself without a hearing person to accompany you, or in need of aid and attendance, there's something called Special Monthly Compensation (SMC) over and above your VA comp that you need to apply for. You can do that now. If you run into any trouble with any of this, message me here at hadit. I'm in your area of Louisiana.

Blame doesn't matter. Technically, it's an overpayment that you are now being asked to pay back. Yeah, they probably expected you to set aside the difference in the expectation that they'd come back looking for it someday. You need something now that's only theirs to give, a waiver. Personally, I would stay away from mentioning CUE and try to keep this simple. Write a waiver request letter, stating that you are total and permanent disabled, that you had made several attempts to do the right thing removing your child from dependant status, that you had financial emergencies in the past, and that this would create a hardship for your entire family by having your comp reduced to repay the overpayment. I don't believe this is a CUE, but would stress the point that this would be a financial catastrophe for your entire family, and be polite and maybe perhaps throw in an apology for the situation, even though it's not your fault. I wouldn't escalate it with a Congressional rep unless you were denied. If that happens, you file a Notice of Disagreement and treat it like a claims denial, THEN copy your Congressional rep. More info here: http://www.nolo.com/legal-encyclopedia/overpayments-veterans-benefits-paying-them-back-the-va.html

Of course, you could call the BVA and ask if there's any idea of when the decision will be made. If the BVA is aware that the exam has been scheduled, which I believe they are, the representative would more than likely see that in the computer and mention it to you. You could probably get one reschedule out of the RO, but that's all. My husband got a postponement because I was having outpatient surgery that day and we faxed in documentation of that fact from the doctor.

You will need your hearing tests from 1966 or as close to that date before your service ended. You will also need the rating criteria for hearing loss from the 1966 version of 38 CFR. Did the VA try to get your records or did they just tell you that your records probably burned up in the St. Louis warehouse fire in 1973? Not all records burned up. You should try to request them from the National Personnel Records Center in St. Louis. You can request them online, then fax or mail in your written authorization to release them. If they can't find them, they'll tell you. See where your scores are compared to that criteria. Any possible AO exposure during your service? Who issued you hearing aid in 1980, private provider or the VA? Your depression meds -- issued by the VA -- anything in your medical records connecting depression to hearing loss? Did you tell them that was the reason? That is an implied claim, use the date of your first issuance from the VA of these meds. Did you ever cite hearing loss and/or depression on a workers comp claim? Ear surgery at the VA -- for what? Heart attack during ear surgery? You were ok'd for surgery despite your heart complications? Did you ever apply for Social Security disability when you stopped working? Take a look at the secondary effects of your medications, sleep apnea in particular.

How long before your May hearing had you undergone a comp exam? Sorry, I don't remember your circumstances. Was this an appeal for initial service connection, an increase, an earlier effective date, or a CUE? It wasn't a proposal to reduce a rating, was it? I am guessing that if you were denied and you don't yet know it, the BVA could anticipate that you'd appeal to the CAVC. If your comp exam was outdated, the BVA might also have anticipated that the CAVC would remand your appeal back to the BVA for an updated exam, so this might be the BVA's way of heading that off, like the tail wagging the dog. OR--- the VLJ is doing the responsible thing and getting a current comp exam in order to make a fair and informed decision that might be in your favor. He may have ordered it after your hearing, as he didn't necessarily have to tell you what subsequently occurred to him as a smart thing to do after your hearing was over. You just don't know what the rationale really is, and you won't for awhile. I highly doubt the RO is going rogue on this and ordering a comp exam without the BVA's asking for one. They are more than likely both involved. I compare this process to playing Whack-A-Mole at Chucky Cheese's. When the mole's head pops up, you whack it with all you've got, as fast as you can, take however long a breather lasts until the next mole's head pops up, whack it, etc. Try to forget it inbetween whacks and go on with life.