Jump to content

Jimmer

First Class Petty Officer
  • Content Count

    141
  • Donations

    $0.00 
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    1

Jimmer last won the day on June 22 2017

Jimmer had the most liked content!

Community Reputation

67 Excellent

About Jimmer

  • Rank
    E-5 Petty Officer 2nd Class

Previous Fields

  • Service Connected Disability
    100%
  • Branch of Service
    USMC
  • Hobby
    None

Recent Profile Visitors

1,015 profile views
  1. Hi Ms. Berta, The VA stated that I was discharged from the Marines "for disability which pre-existed service and was not aggravated by service". This is pure BS. I have the medical evidence that upon induction into the Marines I was "fit" for duty and my eyesight was normal. Upon my BVA hearing the judge "shot down" the VA claim , saying "the board finds that it should resolve all doubt in favor of the veteran, and the service connection is therefore warranted for residuals of the left eye". The VA also has proof, and the BVA judge mention that I was sent to Balboa Naval Hospital as a result of a incident and had "pain below my left eye, shooting back thru the socket, to the back of my head". But yet until the BVA hearing they maintain I was discharged because of prior poor eyesight. It seems to me they violated the "Presumption of Soundness, among other things.
  2. Broncovet, thanks for the information. I do have the documentation from Balboa Hospital, and the doctor's notes. I will fight this, as I feel the VA completely ignored this information. Vetquest, thanks for the advice. You are 100% correct! I am going to fight for my EED, regardless how or what the VOS said.
  3. Berta/Broncovet, When I filed in 1970, they denied, stating because I was "nearsighted", that I exceeded the allowable vision to be in the Marines. When I was accepted into Marines, I told them I wore glasses, regularly and was near sighted. I had 2-3 exams and the Marines deem my eyes "normal" They didn't for whatever reason address the fact that I was admitted to Balboa Hospital and a eye specialist, recommended that I be discharged because of "trauma" to my eye. When I would file a claim on my eye, it seemed like I was getting the same letter, with a different signature. I never received any compensation until the BVA hearing in which the judge stated it was service connected. I do have a feeling, Broncovet, that because they paid me 10% in 2013 retroactive to 2007, the would use the percentage from 1970 to 2007, which would amount to about $22,000. But I feel the 60% is correct, that is what the C&P exam showed then CUE'D to 80&. I am seeing a "outside" Board certified Eye Specialist, who I have seen off and on for over 20 years, to really nail this down with a exam, letters etc. If the VA has to go back to the 60% retro, then it would be a high six figure amount. As I said this is all in my SMR file, and the VA has had copies of it. They make refence to it, but had continued to stand by their claim, that I had poor eyesight entering the Marines, in which the BVA judge shot down quickly. Thanks for everyone's help.
  4. Hi Everyone, I want to thank all for your support and great advice that you have provided. It has certainly helped me! I had been on the "hamster wheel", until I came here. I have a question pertaining to a E.E,D. My situation may be a little unusual but hear goes: I have been working with a VSO and she has been pretty good, but know I get the feeling she thinks I am "reaching" and trying to "milk" the system, which I am not! My situation involves, I was discharged from the Marines, April 15, 1969. I filed a claim pertaining to my eyes in November 1969, received a denial April 24, 1970. I filed again in 1978, denied, 1987, denied, finally in 2007, I started using a VSO, and later found this site. I had a BVA hearing in 2013, and I was awarded compensation on the eye at 10%. Now, I was discharged from the Marines, because of an accident that happened, that effected my eyes. This is all in my SMR, and I was sent to Balboa naval Station Hospital, where they told me I was going to be discharged because of the incident. The VA maintained that I was discharged because of being nearsighted. I have the records of the entry physical in which I was deemed fir for the Marines, passed the eyesight tests and was told my vision was "normal". The VA fought me on this all they way to the BVA hearing. My 10% disability was granted based on some notes the VA had. I then had a VA C&P exam, and was increased to 60%, then they CUE"D themselves and raised it to 80%. I now found out I basically have no sight in the left eye. I do feel that the 1970 date should be the date of the E.E>D. I also feel that the VA established via exam that I was at 60%, and I feel I should have that from the day the BVA approved my claim. Am I wrong? As I said I feel that the VSO thinks I am being "greedy" without saying in actual words. At the Hospital, I remember the eye doctor giving me his card and saying "you need to get my notes, because if you ever file a disability claim", you will have a battle on your hands". I did get his info, and kept it. Thanks again for all your help.
  5. Ms. Berta, The V.A. claims that they received my claim in April 2014, when I used a VSO that sent in claims for other things and sent information pertaining to my lungs. I was doing it by myself in 2009, and I sent in the claim for the lungs, along with the specialist's letter. I did send it regular mail, I didn't know to send it for a signature. They have the copy of the letter, but say they never received the claim that I filed.
  6. Broncovet/Ms. Berta thanks for your input. In my Rating Decision Letter that I received (BBE) under the section "Evidence" they indicate the letter from the Pulmonologist of July 29, 2009. They make no reference of the latter letter dated September 15, 2009. They make reference to the doctor, along with two other pulmonologists I had, (the one that wrote the letter in 2009, retired in 2013), and state the following "You have provided medical records and correspondence from several pulmonologists, including (the three doctors) whom have all opined your diaphragmatic paralysis is a least like related to the fall during service". So one of the three doctors was the one that wrote the letter in 2009. "The effective date of service-connection is April 14, 2014 the day we received your claim." I totally disagree with that statement!
  7. Broncovet, thanks for the information. I originally applied in 2009, and had the letter submitted at that time.
  8. Hi Everyone, I first want to thank everyone for the fantastic job, that you are doing. I know I would be "completely lost" without your knowledge, wisdom and input. I all of you a great deal of thanks for all the help you are providing. I have a question. I had a DRO hearing, and satisfied with the percentages, but one item, I feel they made an error in the effective date. They gave me a April 2014 date, and I feel it should be July or September 2009. I had a Spirometry test (lungs) and a letter from a Specialist supporting the injury that cause my problem occurred in the military. While he did use the words "more likely then not", he did state that he felt my injury was the result of the accident. I failed to include the letter to the DRO, simply because I have verification the V.A. had received it. In September I had him write another letter which did state the worlds "more likely then not", and went into greater detail. I have no record that the V.A. received it. What would be the best course of action? It is within my one year period. To I introduce the second letter and New evidence? Use bothe letter, they are both from the same doctor. Any help would be greatly appreciated. Thanks, Jimmer
  9. GBArmy: Thanks for the input. I know a number of guys were wondering about the time frame of getting the results, monies, etc. I cannot stress enough about going Prepared for the DRO hearing and being organized! The DRO only had three questions, and I answered them quickly and he was satisfied. I made sure I pointed out the facts, referred to the DBQ's and the "nexus letter", and the qualifications of the doctors. It was not intimating at all. He listened very carefully, took notes. Making a extra copy is a big plus. especially if he writes on the first set you give him.
  10. Hi Everyone, I wanted to share my experience with having a informal DRO hearing and the results, so as to help you when you have your hearing. I had a DRO hearing March 21, 2016. It involved my lungs, back, spine area. My VSO got the results on June 22, 2018, and printed the VA rating Decision letter for me. I got everything I requested, and then some. I was give a rating for the scars on my back, sciatic nerve problems, both right and left leg, along with my lungs, back and spine. I received my Retro Pay on February 19, 2019, (it was over 50K) Nine different payments all on the same day, and I finally received my actual BBE from the V.A March 25, 2019. Some of you will remember my situation, Broncovet, Buck152, Ms. Berta. I am the guy that had a C & P exam, that was supposed to be cancelled (via R.O.) but she was transferred and couldn't notify them, and the doctor I had said "I am going to deny you, that's what I do. I deny everyone, that's why they like me here. But you should appeal, because you have a really good case". Well appeal I did! What I did, rather then get mad, I made sure I had all my evidence. I prepared 28 pages on information, with a table of contents, numbering everything to make it easy for the DRO. I had my DBQ's Nexus letters, and credentials of the doctors. My doctors were "Board Certified Specialists" in their field. I went step by step over the information, and pointed how these doctors were Board Certified. The hearing took 90 minutes, and my VSO said the DRO person I had was one of the top ones, and a really fair individual. I cannot tell you how important the credentials of the doctors were. The DRO constantly made reference to their being Board Certified, and how that out weighed the V.A. doctors. I didn't waste my time being angry, frustrated, etc. I just made sure I had the information available for the DRO. I also made a second packet for him, which he appreciated, as I seen he was taking notes and writing things on the original packet. Also I qualified for SMC-S, as that was indicated on the letter, and began the beginning of March. So I hope this helps. I made sure I hade the information needed, but didn't want to overwhelm the DRO with couple hundred pages of stuff.
  11. When you put in a claim for any degenerative disc disease, usually they will look to see if you have radiculopathy as well. These seem to go together. I filed for a degenerative disc disease, and they award that , along with the radiculopathy, 10% for left side, 10% for right side. They also might be looking to see if you have sciatic nerve damage as well. That will be another 10%-20% for each side. This is what might be the hold up. I was given 10% on right side and 10% left side for sciatic nerve damage, along with radiculopathy, even tho I never filed a claim for them.
  12. broncovet, thanks for the information. I agree with you, I will get an attorney, at the CAVC level. I figured I would need to go that route, and I just wanted to get verification for this. I will follow your advice, and will get the process rolling immediately. Once again, thank you for help on this matter. Jimmer
  13. Hi Everyone, I really want to thank you all for the great job, you are doing. You have really helped me out in filing my Disability Claims, as the V.A. had me twisted up in a knot, before I get the valuable help from all of you. I have an interesting question. In 2006, I filed a disability claim for my left eye, and naturally was denied. I was denied again, even tho the verification of my injury was in my SMR. Finally I had a BVA hearing in 2013, and I was approved. I was low-balled at 10%, immediately filed a NOD, received a C & P exam, was raised to 60%, two months later the V.A. CUE'D themselves and raise it to 80%. They did give me a EED date of 2007. I contacted the VA and stated I had filed claims on my left eye in 1970, 1973, and 1978, and they were denied. The V.A. claimed they had no record of me ever filing a claim. I just went thru my SMR page by page, looking over everything, and I found letter from the V.A. stating "You were previously denied service connection for your eye condition. You were notified of the decision on 04-24-1970". I know the V.A. had received the claim, because this letter was stamped by the V.A. saying "copy provided by VARO Phoenix". I feel that I should have this as my EED. I know the VA. would fight me like hell, because of the length of time of the award. And I do realize I did initially receive 10% in 2007, so I would be acceptable with that. So after the V.A. telling me for years and years they never received my claim, I have proof. What would be the course of action to take at this point. I got out of the Marine Corps in late 1969, and I my eye injury with my eye was the reason for being discharged, along with other secondary problems.
  14. How does this happen? I have 80% disability for my eyes, and I had four different eye specialists, that wrote "nexus letters" verifying it was service connected, which was documented in my SMR's. I also had a C & P eye exam, that lasted over five hours, as they gave me every test available to verify my eye injury. They rated me 60%, then a few months later "CUED" themselves and gave me 80%.
  15. This "scum" should have to spend the rest of his life in prison. He did it twice, and then wants the judge to give him a break? The judge should have brought the hammer down! I have bee dealing with the V.A, eleven years, and it took me seven years to even begin to get my disability compensation, when the information was clearly in my SMR. And this clown lies about being in the service, combat and basically gets a "free pass" for compensation. Why wasn't this guy "flagged" after the first offense. It isn't that difficult, to put some kind of control, that would have alerted the V.A. this guy is a scammer. I just don't get it....
×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

{terms] and Guidelines