TexasMarine

In many PTSD cases, a positive end result occurs when the VA representative rules in  your favor.  In most of these cases the claim was considered by two mental health professionals.  One for you, and one for the VA (C&P).  Each of the MH Pros are weighted, based on their status.  If the VA's MH Pro is a psychologist, and yours is a Psychiatrist, that "weighs" more heavily in your favor.  Conversely, if the VA puts up a psychiatrist, and you put up a psychologist, that would work against your goals, if the VA's Pro gave you poor results. If both are Psychiatrists, the number and type of letters behind their names, determines who's opinion is favored.  Now, this is just a limited view of the process, but a Psychiatrist's opinion will always weigh more that that of a nurse practioner for example.  This example assumes both sides developed their respective findings properly.
jmho
TexasMarine

NO
To qualify for SMC  you need another disabling SC Disability that is rated up from your existing SC Disability to qualify.
if your at 60& 0r 70%  or 80% even 90% combined disability's  then you would need another SC Disability to get you To the 100% then the VA looks at the SMC Tables to see if you meet the SMC Criteria..if you do then its statutory for them to infer  the SMC
its what they did with me anyway.
.......Buck

Get one of those new 21-526 e-z electronic forms and fill it out and print. Next, find the reason you're due the SMC- K and the medical evidence to prove it. Figure out what effective date it is due from supported by the SMRs. Use that as your effective date. Asking for SMC is not so much a claims filing but an entitlement VA always seems to disremember. The date you ask for it is immaterial as it is awarded based on when you qualify(ied). K entitlements are fairly obvious. A missing arm or leg (or both). Blind in one eye, totally deaf, Masectomy(ies), having both your buttocks shot off, loss of or loss of use of a creative organ, etc. Some will require more than photographic proof. You may have up to three (3) K awards simultaneously. I think Uncle Sam is chintzy. $102 bucks a month extra for losing your foot? $204 for both? Jez. I forgot. They give you free prosthesis stuff.

If he is awarded IU and his combined disability is still at 80/90%he would still need a 70% rating for another SC Disability to reach the SMC , however there are some special rates the rater can use if he can't take care of himself, you need to write in a ''support of statement of claim  what you mention to us here on hadit  as for as you having to help him get dressed  use the bathroom memory problems,ect,,ect,,, they do have a hardship benefit they can expedite for family relief...its in the SMC's  somewhere I forget what they call it?   maybe unusual & special circumstances and unable to take care of him self b/c of his SC Disability
I'll try to look it up.
just hang in there and remember to keep all correspondence with the VA Using internet & snail mail & keep those return paid receipts (greencard)
jmo
...................Buck

Generally speaking, if he is Awarded IU, it will in most cases, be directly related to his PTSD 70% Rating. The Knee, Hip, lowered Back, nerve root and Hearing SC's really don't factor in to making him IU.
In essence, VA would be temporarily giving him 100% for his PTSD 70%, because his MH condition precludes him from doing any type of SGI producing Employment, to include Sedentary Work. His other SC's, while disabling, would not by themselves make him IU. His past 12 mos reported earned income, has been less than $12,400, right?
You may ask why I say "Temporarily Rated IU," I know everyone talks about IU Awards with T & P No Future Exams Scheduled. T & P only refers to the SC'd Disabilities, not the IU Award itself. You go back to work, start earning in excess of the SGI for 12 consecutive months, without interruption, an IU Reduction is probable. A Vet would then be returned to his pre IU comp level.
If his other SC's excluding the 70 for PTSD, combine to 60+% scheduler, he may be awarded SMC S (1). If not, he could appeal the Decision or a faster way, would be to go for the S (2), if his Dr will complete the VA Housebound Form.
Semper Fi

First of all, it is confusing, even to those of us who've been dealing with "IT" (the VA) for some time, so don't hesitate to ask your questions here at Hadit.  Many folks here are much more conversant than I, but I will try to discuss it as I understand the issue.
At 70% for one disability (in his case, PTSD), he should be receiving what is called IU (Individually Unemployable).  It is very important that you gain that status first, unless the vet has some disability that is rated 100%.  IU, will in effect, disable him to 100%, with all the benefits therein.
So ...  Is he IU?  If your total benefit is in excess of $3000, your husband is probably rate IU, or 100% for his PTSD.  If not, that would be the first thing I would do; get him rated IU.  There are plenty of discussions about IU here on Hadit.
If he is IU, the next thing you must accomplish is to get him rated at 60% for one OTHER disability.  Having a 100% rating and one additional rating of 60% or more generally qualifies a person for housebound.  That would accomplish one SMC award.  Please read this form on SMC awards, as there are other awards he may be qualified for.
TexasMarine

https://vetadvocates.org/veterans-help/the-fees-which-may-be-charged-by-an-agent-or-attorney/

Seems to be a trendy quarter for that.  The VA has been stalling on providing records request more so than normal.  Time frame on getting information even after multiple request have been ignored. Shouldn't take more than 20 duty for requested information.  I asked for a record on a specific date, specific exam and still NADA, ZIP, ZILCH.
I agree with you totally on the direct attempt to stall on information that is vital to your claims.

Not a "sure sign", imo.  Ebennies is not updated "properly" in "real-time".  In other words, you cannot count on it being correct at any given time.

The loss of teeth by themselves are not ratable since they are not truly disabling and are easily replaced by false teeth. Teeth also cannot be rated if they are lost from naturally occurring diseases related to ageing. They must be lost as a result of injury, accident, or diseases such as osteomyelitis.
If the loss of teeth is caused by part of either the maxilla or mandible missing, then it can either be rated under the following code or under the codes for the missing maxilla or mandible, whichever code provides the higher rating. If not enough of the mandible or maxilla is missing to qualify for a rating under their codes, then the condition is simply rated here. The condition cannot be rated twice, once for the maxilla or mandible and once for the teeth. Only one or the other.
Code 9913: Regardless of how many teeth are missing, if they can be replaced by a prosthesis or false teeth, then it is rated 0%. If, however, they cannot be replaced, they are rated as follows:
All teeth missing is rated 40%. The loss of all the upper teeth or all the lower teeth is rated 30%. If all the upper and lower posterior teeth or all the upper and lower anterior teeth are missing, it is rated 20%. If only all the upper anterior teeth or all the lower anterior teeth are missing, it is rated 10%. If all the upper and lower teeth on one side are missing, then it is also rated 10%.

After reading the above I think I am going to be 0% S/C for my Mouth Condition claim secondary to my Anorexia Nervosa. I sure hope so b/c I just found out that if I am even 0% S/C for dental I am eligible for dental at my local VA.

I found this:

Dental Benefits for Veterans Dental benefits are provided by the Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) according to law. In some instances, VA is authorized to provide extensive dental care, while in other cases treatment may be limited. This Fact Sheet describes dental eligibility criteria and contains information to assist Veterans in understanding their eligibility for VA dental care. Outpatient Dental Program The eligibility for outpatient dental care is not the same as for most other VA medical benefits and is categorized into classes. If you are eligible for VA dental care under Class I, IIA, IIC, or IV you are eligible for any necessary dental care to maintain or restore oral health and masticatory function, including repeat care. Other classes have time and/or service limitations.

Have a service-connected compensable dental disability or condition. Any needed dental care Class I (This would be me if I get the above 0%)

Are a former prisoner of war. Any needed dental care. Class IIC

Have service-connected disabilities rated 100% disabling, or are unemployable and paid at the 100% rate due to serviceconnected conditions. Any needed dental care. [Please note: Veterans paid at the 100% rate based on a temporary rating, such as extended hospitalization for a serviceconnected disability, convalescence or pre-stabilization are not eligible for comprehensive outpatient dental services based on this temporary rating]. Class IV

Apply for dental care within 180 days of discharge or release (under conditions other than dishonorable) from a period of active duty of 90 days or more during the Persian Gulf War era. One-time dental care if your DD214 certificate of discharge does not indicate that a complete dental examination and all appropriate dental treatment had been rendered prior to discharge.* Class II

Come on 0% S/C for my teeth!!!!!

From the B&M website:
 
Bergmann & Moore welcomes all types of cases, and we focus on difficult cases for post-traumatic stress disorder (PTSD), military sexual trauma (MST) and individual unemployability (IU).
Case Specialities
We welcome Veterans appealing disability claims for posttraumatic stress disorder (PTSD) pending before CAVC. Veterans with PTSD and military sexual trauma (MST) are treated equally and with the dignity and respect earned from wearing our nation’s military uniform.

From the B&M website:
 
Bergmann & Moore welcomes all types of cases, and we focus on difficult cases for post-traumatic stress disorder (PTSD), military sexual trauma (MST) and individual unemployability (IU).
Case Specialities
We welcome Veterans appealing disability claims for posttraumatic stress disorder (PTSD) pending before CAVC. Veterans with PTSD and military sexual trauma (MST) are treated equally and with the dignity and respect earned from wearing our nation’s military uniform.

Many law firms are selective.  Most are not "non profit" organizations and need to turn a profit to keep the doors open and pay the help.   I have been turned down by several.  It takes persistence.  While, yes, my feelings were hurt when lawyers turned down my case, I needed to realize it was not personal...they have expertise where they have expertise, and my issues were not one of them.  People tend to "like" things they are good at and had success with.  If a law firm had good results with a few MST, cases, for example, they may well like to specialize in them.  Our whole world is highly specialized.  You dont go to a "doc" you go to 
a "surgeon specializing in surgery of the hand" if you want hand surgery.  A brain surgeon may not want to go there.  
It reminds me when those satellite dish companies advertise for service for 19.99 per month.  Now, sir, would you like a receiver so you can actually receive the signal so you dont have to climb on the roof to watch your favorite shows?  That will be another 15.00 per month.  Of course, that is for a black and white analog TV which is not broadcast anymore.  HD receivers are 25.00 per month rental, and that is per TV, and you said you have 3 tV's?   Now, with taxes, fees, one time charges, recurring monthly charges, programmed in price increases, sales commissions, and fees for charging fees fees, your total comes to $159 per month and we plan on raising that as soon as we get the chance.  Of course you can not cancel as you are locked into a 2 year contract which automatically renews for 10 years.  
You would be better off just paying the attorney 30 percent then to have all the fees added.  

Thanks for your input on this Alex.  According to NOLO, at this website, Attorney fees are "capped" at 33%.
http://www.nolo.com/legal-encyclopedia/hiring-va-certified-disability-lawyer.htm
where it specifically states:
"Disability Benefits Appeals
Attorneys are permitted by law to charge between 20% and 33½% for handling an appeal, but cannot charge more than 33%. These fees will be paid to the attorney only if the veteran wins the appeal and the veteran is awarded benefits. Typically these fees will be paid directly out of the veteran's lump sum payment from the VA."
end NOLO quote.   If NOLO is in error, then someone should tell them.   
This is consistent with 38 CFR 14.636(f), as follows:
(f) Presumptions. Fees which do not exceed 20 percent of any past-due benefits awarded as defined in paragraph (h)(3) of this section shall be presumed to be reasonable. Fees which exceed 331/3 percent of any past-due benefits awarded shall be presumed to be unreasonable. These presumptions may be rebutted through an examination of the factors in paragraph (e) of this section establishing that there is clear and convincing evidence that a fee which does not exceed 20 percent of any past-due benefits awarded is not reasonable or that a fee which exceeds 331/3 percent is reasonable in a specific circumstance.
end regulation quote.  
I agree that at least one interpretation of 14.636(f) suggests that "unreasonable" fees (fees exceeding 33.33%) "may be rebutted through an examination of factors".   So, as you said, they can go above, but will have to justify the fee to the court.  
In particular, I dont like the VA "capping" attorney fees especially in unusual circumstances, such as relatively "small" retro amounts where the attorney has to put in mucho work to get it.  Frankly, like the VA fiduciary program, the theory is that it "protects" Veterans, while it often really hurts them more.  Im an adult, over 21, and really dont need VA "looking after my interests" as they "looked after my interests" ENOUGH when they made me wait more than 3 years for my benefits with disastrous results.  The VA indicates they dont want to pay Vets right away, as it may "hurt" if they have to take the money back.  Im a big boy.   They did that, too. 

AskNod, you make very good points.
The homepage of the B&M website would lead anyone to believe they "specialize" in mental health issues.  You are very right in that they will represent other issues.
I've read that the VA loses paperwork mailed to them. Ebennie-submitted documents are no different.  In other words, the VA can still say they simply didn't receive them.  I like the fact the important paperwork can be hand-delivered to the court, with receipt.  Less suspicious.  Less worrisome.
I know about the horse-trading.  Had to do a little myself.
These statements are only meant to show minor disagreement, with all due respect.
The bulk of your post is well-received, and very informative.
TexasMarine

From the B&M website:
 
Bergmann & Moore welcomes all types of cases, and we focus on difficult cases for post-traumatic stress disorder (PTSD), military sexual trauma (MST) and individual unemployability (IU).
Case Specialities
We welcome Veterans appealing disability claims for posttraumatic stress disorder (PTSD) pending before CAVC. Veterans with PTSD and military sexual trauma (MST) are treated equally and with the dignity and respect earned from wearing our nation’s military uniform.

Texas Marine, you need to read more articles on B&M. They exclusively represent all appeals of the Vietnam Veterans of America. The law is dispositive on the % charged. There is none. A Vet attorney, could he/she justify it, can charge 50% if they so choose. Most Vet Attorneys charge 20% because they enjoy repping Vets. Since 2007, it has become quite fashionable to do so. 33 1/3% gets you no more than 20% at the BVA or CAVC in quality. The motivation and intelligence of the representative is what you pay for- not his proximity to the Court. Ken Carpenter is unarguably the best and could quite possibly get 40% but he settles for 20. Considering he resides and works out of Kansas, that geographical dog you mention won't hunt. As for geographical proximity, in the electronic environment we now inhabit, there is no snail mail to the CAVC. It's called e-filing. It takes just seconds to send it in to 625 Wagon Burner Lane NW from anywhere in the country. In addition, not all jurisprudence occurs at 810 Vermont Ave or 625 Indiana Ave. NW. A great majority of it occurs at your local Regional Office. I have attorney friends in San Diego "fix" problems in Sioux Falls SD and other Regional Offices every day without having to journey there to do so. Likewise, there is no "trial" with attorneys facing one another in Court at the CAVC. On rare occasions, an oral hearing will be held to allow a Vet attorney to address the Court on a legal matter of first impression. This happens about 10 times a year-hardly a reason to lease expensive digs in Georgetown for a law office to be "closer to the action".
A good attorney is definitely one who responds to your queries and keeps you in the loop. You should never have to pay extra for that service. Perhaps the best I have ever seen in this business are Vet attys. who are one-man bands such as Bob Walsh, Katrina Eagle and Keith Snyder. Too much support staff can lead to snafus of immense proportions. Any atty. who has his client prepare the claim has not done his job. You  are called upon to provide a timeline/diary of events when possible. You might be called upon to explain discrepancies in the c-file or missing documents you alone may possess. An attorney is only as good as you arm him/her with the info needed to win. Over-supervising them or questioning their capabilities/ technique makes them feel inadequate and suspect in your eyes. That's the quickest way to lose representation. Always remember who did the 7 years of college and law school to get here. That's a tremendous investment of time and money. By comparison, try finding a regular civie attorney who will rep you for personal injury for less than 40% nowadays and you can begin to appreciate that 20% number.
Consider also that there are a finite number of attorneys available to the numerous Veterans who seek their services and you can readily understand why they appear to "shop" your claim for viability. I have Vets who approach me with a "What do you think of this? Can I win it?" Why am I the bad guy if I say it's a short trip on the Shortline Railroad to a loss or a financial waste of time/resources? Or perhaps, why would I be interested in fighting for a retro of one year on a Tinnitus claim for 10%? 20% of  $1590.00 is $318 dollars. It would not justify coming to work and turning on the lights.  Veterans need to have a realistic appreciation for what an attorney can and will do for them. BroncoVet speaks volumes about how and when an attorney can best be employed and for what amount of remuneration. 
As for EAJA fees. the current lodestar is about $187 an hour and you can also expect VA to insist on a 25% reduction in the EAJA award without a good legal argument. That drags the number even lower. EAJA is a tip on 20%. I personally think the attorney should get it in addition to the 20%. The Attorney process for VA claims is a closed pool. It's easy law as it is designed to give the Vet a leg up legally on many aspects of law unlike civilian practice. For example, there is no comparable process to CUE in civilian practice. 
Congress' decision to allow VA attorneys into the process in June 2007 was met with howls of indignation by guess who? DAV, AmVets, VFW et al. Now they have all partnered up with attorneys for CAVC/Fed. Circuit representation. DAV actively seeks out their Vets for repping by Chisholm,Chisholm and Kilpatrick. Funny how things change-well, except for crappy representation by VSOs.
Lastly, I consider horse-trading to be one of the quickest ways to a TDIU or a 100% schedular with P&T. Agreeing to give up some claims that are inconsequential to the big picture in return for the big banana is a valuable tool to bargaining. Being obstinate and demanding everything puts off DROs and raters alike. I guess I don't need to say how your attorney takes that when he's trying to do the best he can by you. If your law dog(s) are good, trust them to do it right. The internet is a valuable tool to ascertaining who is good at this and who isn't. Blindly accepting someone based on location or percentage charged is not a valid metric in this day and age. 
With that said-best of luck to whoever you choose.

At 20% you get a lawyer and maybe a paralegal and a secretary located somewhere near you.
At 30% you get more that one lawyer, a staff of paralegals, other support staff, and in the case of B&M, a courier direct to the CAVC or BVA.  You get an expert to represent you AT the CAVC or BVA, not someone who must deal with Teleconferencing, email and snail-mail.
I really can't say how you'd be better off with a lawyer who is not located near the court where your case will be heard.  You may save 10%.  You may also lose your case because of the geographical factor, and that would be a shame.
And while you can still lose with a 30% legal team, I'd rather stack the odds in my favor.
TexasMarine

Once I was denied the first time, at the BVA, I knew that I needed help.  I wasn't sure what to do.  (at the time I did not know about Hadit.)  But soon, I received a bunch of literature in the mail from Lawyers wanting to represent me at the CAVC.
After talking with a few of them, I hired Bergmann & Moore out of Bethesda, MD.  At the time I lived in Nevada, but I figured that a firm located closer to the action (CAVC/BVA), would serve me better than a local lawyer could.  I have since moved from Nevada, to OK, KS, and 3 times in TX.
I selected them for a variety of other reasons as well, but mind you, their fee is 30% of any retro payment I was to receive if they won.  I would owe nothing if they did not win.  While this rate/fee seemed high (as opposed to 20% for other lawyers), B&M gave me the impression that they had "been there and done that" (so to speak).
They would recoup their fee from the CAVC for services rendered there.  They represented me at the CAVC for no charge to me twice!  Not only did they represent me, they collected all the necessary documentation, they prepared my case, they were successful.  They did that while they picked up the tab for staff,  phone, mail, filing fees (if any), all while maintaining a member of their staff ready to help me and answer ALL my questions.  They got their pay from the CAVC.
After their wins at the CAVC, they continued their great service while building my case for the BVA.  I needed a "superpower" IMO.  They paid for it.  I needed bi-weekly updates.  No problem.  When anything happened on my case, I was informed, in a timely manner.  When they needed a signature from me, they Fedexed it with a return FedEx envelope, postage paid.
Their people are confident, capable, intelligent, and polite.  Their leadership is outstanding.  When I felt I needed to talk to one of them, my call was immediately taken by them.
I don't mind paying 33% of any retro because without them I'd have $0.  You pay better money to be treated better, to be reassured, to set high expectations, but most of all, to get the job done.
With Bergmann & Moore you get all that, plus a whole lot more.

I have to say B&M are a bit picky with taking claims and representing, however, the firm does have many successes. I knocked on their door a few times. I went with another well known and he did not turn out to be of any serious gain in my claims. I did the research and evidence organization, however, he didn't give my arguments much attention.  He wanted me to settle in a few areas that I knew were possible to win if I pursued.  Go figure.  Maybe I'm just lucky, however, there is the other possibility.
Good communications, same game plan, and loyalty to the claim, case, and client, play a huge part in your success rate.  JMO

At 20% you get a lawyer and maybe a paralegal and a secretary located somewhere near you.
At 30% you get more that one lawyer, a staff of paralegals, other support staff, and in the case of B&M, a courier direct to the CAVC or BVA.  You get an expert to represent you AT the CAVC or BVA, not someone who must deal with Teleconferencing, email and snail-mail.
I really can't say how you'd be better off with a lawyer who is not located near the court where your case will be heard.  You may save 10%.  You may also lose your case because of the geographical factor, and that would be a shame.
And while you can still lose with a 30% legal team, I'd rather stack the odds in my favor.
TexasMarine

Once I was denied the first time, at the BVA, I knew that I needed help.  I wasn't sure what to do.  (at the time I did not know about Hadit.)  But soon, I received a bunch of literature in the mail from Lawyers wanting to represent me at the CAVC.
After talking with a few of them, I hired Bergmann & Moore out of Bethesda, MD.  At the time I lived in Nevada, but I figured that a firm located closer to the action (CAVC/BVA), would serve me better than a local lawyer could.  I have since moved from Nevada, to OK, KS, and 3 times in TX.
I selected them for a variety of other reasons as well, but mind you, their fee is 30% of any retro payment I was to receive if they won.  I would owe nothing if they did not win.  While this rate/fee seemed high (as opposed to 20% for other lawyers), B&M gave me the impression that they had "been there and done that" (so to speak).
They would recoup their fee from the CAVC for services rendered there.  They represented me at the CAVC for no charge to me twice!  Not only did they represent me, they collected all the necessary documentation, they prepared my case, they were successful.  They did that while they picked up the tab for staff,  phone, mail, filing fees (if any), all while maintaining a member of their staff ready to help me and answer ALL my questions.  They got their pay from the CAVC.
After their wins at the CAVC, they continued their great service while building my case for the BVA.  I needed a "superpower" IMO.  They paid for it.  I needed bi-weekly updates.  No problem.  When anything happened on my case, I was informed, in a timely manner.  When they needed a signature from me, they Fedexed it with a return FedEx envelope, postage paid.
Their people are confident, capable, intelligent, and polite.  Their leadership is outstanding.  When I felt I needed to talk to one of them, my call was immediately taken by them.
I don't mind paying 33% of any retro because without them I'd have $0.  You pay better money to be treated better, to be reassured, to set high expectations, but most of all, to get the job done.
With Bergmann & Moore you get all that, plus a whole lot more.

These are some excellent points, very good to have if a Veteran is considering a lawyer.  I agree with Texas Marine in that if the lawyer is paying for your IMO/IME necessary to win the claim, then 30 percent does not sound as bad considering those IME/IMO's often cost $thousand's.  As I hear so often 70 percent of something is more than 100% of nothing, which is especially the case when a Veteran can not plop down 4 or 5 grand for a game winning IMO/IME.  
Remember, if the CAVC thinks the attorney fees are excessive, they wont be approved.  It may come down to "fees", which I thought were postage, filing fees for the court, travel expenses for the attorney, etc.  No, the big thing about "fees" are th fee for the IMO/IME, and, like the American Express guy says, "Dont leave home without it".  
If you need an IME/IMO, then nothing else will do.  If your retro is 50,000 dollars, then the difference between 20% and 30% is $5000, which is about what it costs for a very good IME/IMO from someone really really good like Dr. Bash.  
"Saving" money by cutting out the IME/IMO may "save" you much more than you bargained for.  It may just "save" you 100% of the Retro, when the lawyer gets you zero.   This makes it all make sense why some lawyers charge 20 and others 30%, especially when they pay for the IMO/IME.  I would say that "MOST" Vets in appeal can not afford $5k up front for an IME/IMO.  They just dont have it.  I can see the denial now, when the VA is on truth serum:
     Dear Veteran
     We are very sorry you could not afford a premium IMO/IME.  Those IMO/IME's are expensive.  Sure VA doc's are free, but you see WE (the VA) pay them to give us evidence to deny.  Here is your denial and now you run along and be poor the rest of your life, or until you figure out how to win your claim.
    Signed...RO Director.  

Once I was denied the first time, at the BVA, I knew that I needed help.  I wasn't sure what to do.  (at the time I did not know about Hadit.)  But soon, I received a bunch of literature in the mail from Lawyers wanting to represent me at the CAVC.
After talking with a few of them, I hired Bergmann & Moore out of Bethesda, MD.  At the time I lived in Nevada, but I figured that a firm located closer to the action (CAVC/BVA), would serve me better than a local lawyer could.  I have since moved from Nevada, to OK, KS, and 3 times in TX.
I selected them for a variety of other reasons as well, but mind you, their fee is 30% of any retro payment I was to receive if they won.  I would owe nothing if they did not win.  While this rate/fee seemed high (as opposed to 20% for other lawyers), B&M gave me the impression that they had "been there and done that" (so to speak).
They would recoup their fee from the CAVC for services rendered there.  They represented me at the CAVC for no charge to me twice!  Not only did they represent me, they collected all the necessary documentation, they prepared my case, they were successful.  They did that while they picked up the tab for staff,  phone, mail, filing fees (if any), all while maintaining a member of their staff ready to help me and answer ALL my questions.  They got their pay from the CAVC.
After their wins at the CAVC, they continued their great service while building my case for the BVA.  I needed a "superpower" IMO.  They paid for it.  I needed bi-weekly updates.  No problem.  When anything happened on my case, I was informed, in a timely manner.  When they needed a signature from me, they Fedexed it with a return FedEx envelope, postage paid.
Their people are confident, capable, intelligent, and polite.  Their leadership is outstanding.  When I felt I needed to talk to one of them, my call was immediately taken by them.
I don't mind paying 33% of any retro because without them I'd have $0.  You pay better money to be treated better, to be reassured, to set high expectations, but most of all, to get the job done.
With Bergmann & Moore you get all that, plus a whole lot more.

"Did it actually go back to review of evidence even though it says notification sent AND it now shows I have a rating on my profile?" 
"Also my estimated completion date changed from 3/29 to 6/06-10/20."
The claim process has "steps' that involve different individuals. As each gets the package, they may ask for more information, make a pass it on the process decision,
or even make an actual decision. There are multiple steps in the "review" portion, that seem to be more extensive when it looks like a claim will be granted.
It's the old miller bit about wheat and chaff. As milling gets finer, the chaff increases, and it's harder to tell the difference.
On top of that, bureaucratic entities will evade/avoid making a decision until they are required to do so, even when the decision may be quite obvious.