Ask Your VA Claims Questions | Read Current Posts
Read Disability Claims Articles
Search | View All Forums | Donate | Blogs | New Users | Rules
allan
-
Posts
2,968 -
Joined
-
Last visited
-
Days Won
3
Content Type
Profiles
Forums
Events
VA Disability and Benefits Information
VA Benefits News
Store
Posts posted by allan
-
-
When you file for increase, secondary claims for ED, orchitis/orchalgia and epidimitis,( if they have been diagnosed in your records), should be filed.
Orchitis/orchalgia are both testicular pain conditions rated at 10% from what I remember reading in the cases. Make sure to show those records to your C&P examiner. They will tell you to not bring records, but the RO is not going to do it for you. I can tell you it really helped to prove my claim. None of my military records were made available to the examiner. Even the VARO rating officer hasn't viewed my service records and they have all the originals.
Hydrocele's and vericocele's get worse over time. Been dealing with it for over 40 yrs. Was rated 20% for incontinance VA says was from the hydrocele/vericocele as a residual of a testicular mass surgery.
-
halos2,
I served nearly four yrs. What I was meaning to say was, i was decomissioning my ship, than let out on a separation the next day without anyone saying I could get health care if needed, or file a claim for the residuals of injuries or illness. I knew I had GI bill and home loan I could use, that was explained to me, but no one talked to me about the claims I should or could file from the injuries and illness that occured during service.
Rubber stamped SOC's by DRO's? I've had several. Think they'll review my case and cut a check for 20K? They'll likely offset my SSDI instead.
-
During the Clinton administration, VA health care buses came around to our rural areas looking to treat Veterans. This was the first time I even heard of having health care for non-combat veterans. I sure needed it after I was discharged in 1971 and would have used it had I known. It was another Vet that convinced me to finally go and get some care.
I was in service one day, and out the next. I was never informed I had any care coming or any claims I could file. It's about time they are made to inform us.
-
To: Veteran Issues by Colonel Dan <VeteranIssues@yahoogroups.com> Subject: [VeteranIssues] VA must pay $20,000 for failure to inform veteran on benefitsDate: Feb 19, 2011 10:29 AM
VA must pay $20,000 for
failure to inform veteran on benefits
Larry Hertz • Poughkeepsie Journal • February
18, 2011
A Newburgh law firm has convinced a federal judge
to sanction the Department of Veterans Affairs for
waiting more than two years before explaining what
benefits a veteran should be receiving, the firm
announced this week.
Katrina J. Eagle, director of the Veteran Service
Group at Finkelstein and Partners, said the $20,000
sanction was believed to be the first ever imposed
on the VA.
Eagle represented Brea, Calif., resident Cleveland
Harvey in a case involving Harvey's VA benefits.
She said the agency had delayed a decision for
nearly two years on Harvey's request for a review of
his veterans benefits.
"For the first time in the history of the Department of
Veterans Affairs, the U.S. Court of Appeals for
Veterans Claims found the VA in civil contempt for
failure to expeditiously handle a veteran's claim
after the court had issued a previous decision on
the case," Finkelstein spokeswoman Danielle Mackey
said.
Eagle said she hoped the court's sanction would
help other veterans receive more timely service from
the VA.
"This is a significant decision for the rights of
veteran claimants. Instead of receiving the benefits
he was due for his sacrifice and service to our
nation, Mr. Harvey dealt with a nightmare of
unnecessary delays and distractions. With this
decision, it is our hope that other veteran claimants
will not have to suffer the same poor treatment," she
said.
Reach Larry Hertz at lhertz@poughkee.gannett.com
or 845-437-4824 begin_of_the_skype_highlighting 845-437-4824 end_of_the_skype_highlighting.
"Keep on, Keepin' on"
Dan Cedusky, Champaign IL "Colonel Dan"
See my web site at:
http://www.angelfire.com/il2/VeteranIssues/
-
To: Veteran Issues by Colonel Dan <VeteranIssues@yahoogroups.com> Subject: [VeteranIssues] CRDP & CRSC, S/C for Prostrate Cancer & AODate: Feb 17, 2011 7:01 AM
http://www.donhq.navy.mil/corb/crscb/crscmainpage.htm
good web site for Combat-Related Special Compensation (CRSC)
Below is a table that summarizes the basic similarities and differences of these programs.
IMPORTANT NOTE FOR VETERANS WITH “PROSTATE CANCER”:
*** Please note that 20 year retirees who are eligible for either program must carefully consider which program they elect to be paid under. Veterans who qualify for CRDP but elect CRSC may lose significant amounts of money by being locked into the program until the “open season” for switching back (January timeframe), should the VA reduce the rating of a given injury. For example, prostate cancer will immediately be rated by the VA at 100% which for Viet Nam Veterans would be combat-related as a presumptive illness due to Agent Orange. However, it is common that a surgery will follow the diagnosis and the VA will reassess the injury within six months. At that point, it is common for the injury rating to be reduced to 20%. In this circumstance, a Veteran could be locked into the CRSC program at 20% (restoring only about $243) but could have had his/her full retirement restored under CRDP (assuming their non-CRSC injuries totaled 50% or more). A Veteran in this circumstance with a total VA rating of 60% ($958) would lose $715 a month by being locked into the CRSC program. For this reason, veterans diagnosed with “prostate cancer” who are receiving CRDP or are about to become eligible for CRDP are not advised to switch to CRSC.
CRSC and CRDP?
The main differences between these programs are as follows:
1. CRSC and CRDP are legislative directives to restore service-earned retired pay that was waived in order to receive VA disability compensation.
2. CRSC is calculated for combat-related disabilities. CRDP is calculated for all service-connected disabilities (disability does not have to be combat-related).
3. Eligibility for CRSC is 10% or greater VA rated disability and retired from military service (no limited amount of military service is required). Eligibility for CRDP is 50% or greater VA rated disability and retired from military service with at least 20 years. (To qualify for CRDP Reservists must have at least 20 qualifying years of service, age 60 or greater, and in receipt of retired pay).
4. CRSC is NOT subject to taxation. CRDP may be subject to taxation.
5. CRSC Program is administered by the Secretary of the Navy, Council of Review Boards, CRSC Board. CRDP is administered by the Defense Finance and Accounting Service (DFAS).
6. CRSC and CRDP payments are subject to division with a former spouse.
__._,_.___"Keep on, Keepin' on"
Dan Cedusky, Champaign IL "Colonel Dan"
See my web site at:
http://www.angelfire.com/il2/VeteranIssues/
-
To: Veteran Issues by Colonel Dan <VeteranIssues@yahoogroups.com> Subject: [VeteranIssues] FW: VA Links Brain Cancer to Agent Orange Exposure in Recent Court DecisionDate: Feb 17, 2011 7:43 AM
From: Robert White
Sent: Thursday, February 17, 2011 8:33 AM
To: Robert White
Subject: VA Links Brain Cancer to Agent Orange Exposure in Recent Court Decision
http://www.prweb.com/releases/2011/02/prweb5080394.htm
VA Links Brain Cancer to Agent Orange Exposure in Recent Court Decision
It is notoriously difficult for veterans to get their disabilities connected to their military service - even when the connection is apparent. In this unique case, the Department of Veterans Affairs was made to concede a very important connection and gave justice to a struggling widow.
Ozark, MO (PRWEB) February 17, 2011
Mrs. Sheree Evans is the surviving spouse of Vietnam Veteran, Edward T. Evans, who passed away from Glioblastoma Multiforme (GM), or more commonly known as brain cancer, in March of 2003. Since this time, Sheree has fought for widow’s benefits from the Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) for her husband’s cause of death as a result of Agent Orange exposure (Board of Veterans' Appeals, Docket No. 05-00 201 / U.S. Court of Appeals for Veterans Claims, Vet. App. No. 06-2190). While Mr. Evans was presumed to have been exposed to Agent Orange during his service in the Vietnam War, one of the most challenging obstacles for Sheree was showing that his exposure to Agent Orange caused the development of brain cancer. VA had consistently maintained that brain cancer is not on their list of Agent Orange-related disabilities, and, as a result, that there is no medical link for the development of this specific cancer to Agent Orange Exposure.
Sheree’s long struggle against VA took her to the Board of Veterans’ Appeals, the highest level of the Veterans Administration’s appeals process. Once she had been denied there, Sheree appealed her case to the Court of Appeals for Veterans Claims. There she was successful in getting the final decision by VA vacated because VA had used an independent medical opinion as evidence, which was merely grounded in the lack of GM being on the Agent Orange Presumptive list as the basis for denying a relationship. VA then ordered another medical opinion which determined that there was no research into the relationship between GM and Agent Orange. Sheree countered with a medical assessment which argued that there was an abundance of research into the relationship between GM and Agent Orange. In a recent decision, the Board of Veterans' Appeals decided that the evidence in favor and against were in equal weight and applied the benefit of the doubt rule and on January 26th, 2011 granted Sheree’s claim. While this is not a precedential decision, VA did admit a link between the two. Time will tell what the outcome of this will amount to, but GM may very well come to be added to the Agent Orange presumptive list.
According to Court documents, Sheree had fought for service connection for the cause of her husband’s death for almost eight years, based on a promise that she had made to him before his death. Sheree plans to write a book in honor of Edward that commemorates his life, his struggle with Post-Traumatic Stress Disorder as a result of his combat experience in Vietnam that left him physically scarred from a shell fragment, and her fight to give him the recognition that he deserves. She is very active with the Order of the Silver Rose, an advocacy group for Veterans and families who have been affected by Agent Orange.
GM is a highly aggressive form of brain cancer which, when left untreated, usually results in death in less than three months. GM has been widely researched and recent studies indicate that there is an increasing prevalence of brain cancers as a result of exposure to toxins (IOM, 2008). Though not specifically studied in Veterans of the Vietnam War, current research shows a causal relationship between herbicide exposure and GM.
The fact is that there is an unusually high number of Vietnam Veterans who suffer from GM and, due to GM’s aggressive nature, a sizable percentage of them have passed on. Studies of the dioxin TCDD, the main dioxin in Agent Orange, in laboratory animals have shown to cause cancers at a variety of sites, including GM (IOM, 2008). These studies have concluded that it is plausible that human exposure to TCDD would cause the same variety of cancers as in laboratory animals. However, there has been a lack of studies on the relationship between Vietnam Veterans and exposure to TCDD. Therefore, the Institute of Medicine, which VA recognizes as the authority of recognizing a relationship between disabilities and Agent Orange, has not issued any reports linking Agent Orange and GM.
*Institute of Medicine. (2008) Veterans and Agent Orange: health effects of herbicides used in Vietnam. Washington, D.C.: National Academies Press.
In accordance with Title 17 U.S.C. Section 107, this material is distributed without profit to those who have expressed a prior interest in receiving the included information for research and educational purposes. Reference: http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/17/107.shtml
"Keep on, Keepin' on"
Dan Cedusky, Champaign IL "Colonel Dan"
See my web site at:
http://www.angelfire.com/il2/VeteranIssues/
-
"She is also unwilling to order labs sooner than every 90 days even though my thyroid results have gone off the charts."
Good luck with trying to get labs any sooner. My appointsments are between 90 days to six months for yrs now.
The cut in percocets may be due to acudomenifen, (spelling) the DEA is saying causes liver damage.
Liver, Kidney function and Thyroid is something I would like to see more often with taking Depacote.
Some Dr's have more trouble then others treating patients with chronic pain. You have to find one that knows how to treat chronic pain and takes an interest in relieving it.
I take as low a dose of breakthrough and controlled release as they have. I don't like waking up screaming out of a dead sleep. But don't want to keep getting the dose increased where the medication no longer has an effect. Also it's taking high doses of pain meds is where you can get alot of problems, besides functioning like a zombie.
-
and possibly even veterans' accounts that Republicans had hoped to hold harmless?
If any political party starts looking to compensate for their wastful spending on the backs of veterans, they will be doing it until there are no benefits left.
My guess is the first ones to even try will be voted out of office.
Saw where we are giving Egypt 40 billion in military aide. Why do we pay for any of these countries military aide?
I guess this country really is broke. They've spent theirs, plus what we've earned and scraficed for.
Maybe we should all go into the nursing home business. My mothers room rate soon goes to $600 pr day, after her insurance pays in.
-
From: VA Media Relations <va.media.relations@VA.GOV>
To: VANEWS-L@WWW.LISTSERV.VA.GOV Subject: VA & HUD Issue First-Ever Report on Homeless Veterans
Date: Feb 10, 2011 9:42 AMRecent VA News Releases To view and download VA news releases, please visit the following Internet address: http://www.va.gov/opa/pressrel <http://www.va.gov/opa/pressrel>
VA & HUD Issue First-Ever Report on Homeless VeteransAssessment Key to Preventing and Ending Homelessness
WASHINGTON - For the first time, the Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) and the Department of Housing and Urban Development today published the most authoritative analysis of the extent and nature of homelessness among Veterans. According to HUD and VA's assessment, nearly 76,000 Veterans were homeless on a given night in 2009 while roughly 136,000 Veterans spent at least one night in a shelter during that year. This unprecedented assessment is based on an annual report HUD provides to Congress and explores in greater depth the demographics of Veterans who are homeless, how the number of Veterans compare to others who are homeless, and how Veterans access and use the nation's homeless response system. HUD's report, Veteran Homelessness:
A Supplement to the 2009 Annual Homeless Assessment Report to Congress http://www.hudhre.info/documents/2009AHARVeteransReport.pdf , examines the data in the department's annual report to Congress in-depth."With our federal, state and community partners working together, more Veterans are moving into safe housing," said Secretary of Veterans Affairs Eric K. Shinseki. "But we're not done yet. Providing assistance in mental health, substance abuse treatment, education and employment goes hand-in-hand with preventive steps and permanent supportive housing. We continue to work towards our goal of finding every Veteran safe housing and access to needed services."Last June, President Obama announced the nation's first comprehensive strategy to prevent and end homelessness, including a focus on homeless Veterans. The report, Opening Doors: Federal Strategic Plan to Prevent and End Homelessness, puts the country on a path to end Veterans and chronic homelessness by 2015; and to ending homelessness among children, family, and youth by 2020. Read more about the Administration's strategic plan to prevent and end homelessness in America <http://www.usich.gov/PDF/OpeningDoorsOverview.pdf> . Key Findings ofOpening Doors: Federal Strategic Plan to Prevent and End Homelessness Ø More than 3,000 cities and counties reported 75,609 homeless Veterans on a single night in January of 2009; 57 percent were staying in an emergency shelter or transitional housing program while the remaining 43 percent were unsheltered. Veterans represent approximately 12 percent of all homeless persons counted nationwide during the 2009 'point-in-time snapshot.' Ø During a 12-month period in 2009, an estimated 136,000 Veterans-or about 1 in every 168 Veterans-spent at least one night in an emergency shelter or transitional housing program. The vast majority of sheltered homeless Veterans (96 percent) experienced homelessness alone while a much smaller share (four percent) was part of a family. Sheltered homeless Veterans are most often individual white men between the ages of 31 and 50 and living with a disability. Ø Low-income Veterans are twice as likely to become homeless compared to all low-income adults. HUD and VA also examined the likelihood of becoming homeless among American Veterans with particular demographic characteristics. In 2009, twice as many poor Hispanic Veterans used a shelter at some point during the year compared with poor non-Hispanic Veterans. African American Veterans in poverty had similar rates of homelessness. Ø Most Veterans who used emergency shelter stayed for only brief periods. One-third stayed in shelter for less than one week; 61 percent used a shelter for less than one month; and 84% stayed for less than three months. The report also concluded that Veterans remained in shelters longer than did non-Veterans. In 2009, the median length of stay for Veterans who were alone was 21 days in an emergency shelter and 117 days in transitional housing. By contrast, non-veteran individuals stayed in an emergency shelter for 17 days and 106 days in transitional housing. Ø Nearly half of homeless Veterans were located in California, Texas, New York and Florida while only 28 percent of all Veterans were located in those same four States. Ø The report studied the path homeless Veterans take into the shelter system and found most Veterans come from another homeless location and few entered the shelter system from their own housing or from housing provided by family or friends. Ø Sheltered homeless Veterans are far more likely to be alone rather than part of a family household; 96 percent of Veterans are individuals compared to 63 percent in the overall homeless population. For more information on VA's efforts to end homelessness among Veterans, visit VA's Web page at www.va.gov/homelessness.# # #
-
To: Veteran Issues by Colonel Dan <VeteranIssues@yahoogroups.com> Subject: [VeteranIssues] This Veteran Homelessness: A Supplemental Report to the 2009 Annual Homeless Assessment Report to CongressDate: Feb 10, 2011 10:20 AM
Go to this web site, click on state to see where some grants went
http://www.hud.gov/offices/cpd/homeless/budget/2010/index.cfm
http://www.hudhre.info/documents/2009AHARVeteransReport.pdf
This Veteran Homelessness: A Supplemental Report to the 2009 Annual Homeless Assessment Report to Congress was developed by a team of researchers from Abt Associates Inc. and the U.S. Department of Veterans Affairs National Center on Homelessness Among Veterans
Below is a summary of major findings.
Point-in-Time Estimates of Homelessness Among Veterans
On a single night in January 2009, 75,609 veterans were homeless; 57 percent were staying in an emergency shelter or transitional housing program; and the remaining 43 percent were living on the street, in an abandoned building, or another place not meant for human habitation (i.e., unsheltered).
Veterans are overrepresented among the homeless population. At a point in time in 2009, approximately 12 percent of all people (and 16 percent of adults) experiencing homelessness identified as a veteran, as did 10 percent of those homeless over the course of a year. Less than 8 percent of the total U.S. population has veteran status.
One-Year Estimates of Sheltered Homelessness Among Veterans
An estimated 136,334 veterans spent at least one night in an emergency shelter or transitional housing program between October 1, 2008 and September 30, 2009. This accounts for 1 of every 168 veterans in the U.S. or 1 out of every 10 veterans living in poverty.
Just over 96 percent of sheltered veterans were individuals, and just less than 4 percent were veterans who were a part of a family.
While homeless veterans make up less than 1 percent of all veterans, within the poverty population veterans are at greater risk of homelessness than non-veterans. Ten percent of veterans in poverty became homeless at some point during the year, compared to just over 5 percent of adults in poverty.
Executive Summary i
Characteristics of Sheltered Homeless Veterans
Homeless veterans are most often white men, between the ages of 31 and 50 years, with a disability, and alone in shelter.
The small number of sheltered homeless veterans in families typically are younger, minority women and less likely to have a disability. However, sheltered homeless veterans in families are more likely to have a male adult present in the household than other homeless families.
Veterans with High Risk of Becoming Homeless
Rates of homelessness among veterans living in poverty are particularly high for veterans identifying as Hispanic/Latino (1 in 4) or African American (1 in 4).
Two groups of homeless veterans—women and people between age 18 and 30—are small in number. However, female veterans and young veterans are at high risk of becoming homeless, and both groups are growing within the overall veteran population.
Location of Homeless Veterans
Similar to the overall homeless population, almost half of homeless veterans on a given night were located in four states: California, Florida, Texas, and New York. Only 28 percent of all veterans were located in those same four states.
The share of homeless veterans located in the densest urban areas (or principal cities) is more than twice that of all veterans (72 percent compared to 31 percent).
"Keep on, Keepin' on"
Dan Cedusky, Champaign IL "Colonel Dan"
See my web site at:
http://www.angelfire.com/il2/VeteranIssues/
-
New court provides hand out to Veterans
Sunday, February 6, 2011 at noon
Nelvin C. Cepeda / U-T /p>
The first veteran to appear in San Diego County's new court for those with emotional battlefield scars stands next to his lawyer, public defender Steven Binder.
Veterans with emotional scars from the battlefield have a new hand out to them when they break the law.
The San Diego County Veterans court processed its first two cases Friday, offering a former Marine and a former soldier a small haven in the judicial system.
The two Veterans, who both served in Iraq, will be required to stay in treatment programs and return to court for check-in with a judge every few weeks. Their reward: Fines stemming from their assault convictions will be put on hold and, in one case, eventually dismissed.
Veterans courts are on the rise nationally, and in California, in acknowledgment of the combat stress of the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan.
San Diego’s program is the seventh in the state.
To qualify, a Veteran must have a service-related mental health problem, such as post traumatic stress disorder, traumatic brain injury, depression or anxiety or be the victim of sexual abuse that occurred in the military.
After conviction, a sentencing judge has the option of redirecting an eligible person to Veterans court.
In the courtroom Friday, the two Veterans were introduced to people from various programs — the Department of Veterans Affairs, Veterans Village of San Diego and volunteer veteran mentors — who are intended to help them navigate the system.
“You are not alone in the circumstances in which you find yourself,” San Diego Superior Court Judge Roger Krauel, a Vietnam veteran who served with Army special forces, told a defendant.
The San Diego program is a pilot project with room for 20 veterans. Typical cases are expected to be first-time offenders convicted of misdemeanors and felonies that allow probation, such as drunk driving and weapons possession.
Violent felonies, such as rape, arson, attempted murder, or any crimes involving great harm to a person, are not eligible.
If a Veteran drops out of the program, his or her probation may be revoked.
Buffalo, N.Y., is home to one of the first veterans courts, established in early 2008.
A spokesman for that program said 53 Veterans have graduated, which means they were clean of drugs and alcohol for a year. No program participants have been arrested again, though eight left without finishing.
In San Diego County, the VA is working with 353-Iraq and Afghanistan Veterans who have criminal cases on their records. And, 251 people booked at county jail since January 2010, have identified themselves as Veterans, said Steven Binder, a county public defender who is part of the veterans court program
"Keep on, Keepin' on"
Dan Cedusky, Champaign IL "Colonel Dan"
See my web site at:
http://www.angelfire.com/il2/VeteranIssues/
-
If every veteran is being advized to drop all of the MS secondary issues until they win the 30%, then this would explain why your seing nothing but the 30% awards.
All veterans with MS should not listen to advice Service Organizations are putting out when it comes to filing MS claims.
One, they don't know how MS is rated and may be legally sued for losses if they don't watch themselves.
MS varies from person tp person.
That's why the VA starts with 30% and adds each secondary issue to it. To advize vets to do anything less but file for it all is cheating vets out of due process.
-
That seemed to work for now.
Can't figure out why it happens so often though.
Will try to remember to just dump the cookies next time.
Thanks......................Allan
-
If your a veteran getting examined at the VAMC, the first thing they will try to lable any neuro defect on is alchohol. You can have nerve conductions and brain MRI's showing damage, and they will still try to stick a lable on you with alchohol caused.
Like vaccines, AO, Zinc Chromate, Red lead and fuels are incabable of causing nerve problems, so you must be a drunk.
-
In two yrs, hardly anything gets done.
You send the AMC evidence, than it collects dust for six months to a yr, maybe two yrs, until the AMC passes it off to one of their lame RO's like St Petes who barely skims over the evidence enough to work up a denial. Than it takes another yr making its way back to an AMC rater who sends you the SOC(statement of the case).
You'll be lucky to get an SOC in less than two yrs.
If you get a C&P or independent IME you need to send in, I don't advize sending it to the AMC or RO they passed it off to. Send in a waiver of AOJ (VARO) level of review of evidence.
This puts your evidence back in the hands of the BVA to evaluate.
It's a big time saver. I mean it saves yrs.
No matter what evidence you send in, "always" send it return receipt.
-
Hello there,
I'm back to having to sign in again for every post I reply to.
I sign in, the post can no longer be found. i then have to go find the post again and reply to it.
I find another post I want to reply to and the process starts all over again. I have to resign in, then go find the post again, then make the reply.
After that It signs me out for some reason.
Can you Fix?
Allan
-
The AMC is a dead zone the RO's send their appeals claims to collect dust.
Mine was stuck there for over 5 yrs until I started sending in waivers to have the BVA view the evidence and not the AMC.
The AMC is a VARO level of claims review. Once the BVA actually recieved my claim, I recieved a partial award and the remaining issues went to the court.
Do anything you can to get your claim out of the AMC. Even if you could actually talk to someone there, you can't believe a word they tell you. You can't even trust the confusing addresses they tell you to send evidence to.
Congress and the VA could improve the claims process greatly by completely doing away with the AMC altogether.
-
I'm getting the same error.
-
Traumatic Brain Injury (TBI) Signs & Symptoms
Signs and Symptoms of TBI
-
I took flexeral for a few decades & have had better results with spasms since taking baclofen. Been taken it now for over 5 yrs.
I have ataxia, so can't tell if it makes me dizzy. Feel that way all the time. Take Buspar for anxiety with good results.
Depending on nerve flair ups, still get some severe spasms.
-
You can find out how MS is rated at this link
4.124a - Schedule of Ratings - Neurological Conditions and Convulsive Disorders
http://www.benefits.va.gov/warms/docs/regs/38CFR/BOOKC/PART4/S4_124a.DOC
-
Welcome to Hadit.com,
Im so sorry to hear how the VA has treated you. But have to say it doesn't surprize me in the least.
I have a claim for MS still pending.
The PVA has been one of the best service organizations for me with a neuromuscular disorder.
[there is more but after the dav sent this off i was told OMG! NO! that is a shotgun claim it will be denied.. so i didnt submit anymore for now.. lol
one of my main questions is should i have put in only a claim for ms? or did i do the right thing by putting in for all that i had medical documentation for?
also will they rate my symptoms seperately or will they call it pyramiding? i have seen different answers for this question but i have been told no they have to be rated seperately but no actual reg or paper showing this.
I also dont know if any of the above is actually claimable!]
I was advized that I was claiming too much and the VA will likely deny it. So I turned it over to an Attorney.
With MS, the VA will give you 30% max unless you claim all your secondary health issues. Theres alot of them with MS, so I figured the VA will just have to deal with it.
Expect a claim for MS to take many yrs to be approved. If you want them to pay your retro award for only 30% back a decade or so, then wait to file all the secondary issues as your service officer is sugesting. "AFTER" they approve the claim. You will loose thousands.
Besides, the VA will not be able to fully understand the effect of MS has on you, without listing all your secondary issues, backed up with medical evidence. They need to know the whole picture.
It will help if you were diagnosed within the 7 yr period following separation and have plenty of service records of MS symptoms.
When your claim is denied once, I would turn it over to an attorney instead of using an NSO.
-
Subject: DAV News Release - Rep. Bachmann Drops Veterans Budget Cut Proposal Amid DAV PressureDate: Feb 4, 2011 1:06 PMAfter the Disabled American Veterans and other groups sharply criticized a scheme to cut $4.5 billion from veterans health care and disability compensation, Rep. Michele Bachmann (R-Minn.) has removed the controversial proposal from her Web site. In recent days, Bachmann has received thousands of phone calls, emails, and Facebook posts calling on her to back away from the proposals to severely cut essential veterans programs. Bachmann’s press release is available on here
Web site here: http://bachmann.house.gov/News/DocumentSingle.aspx?DocumentID=223583. “We are pleased that Rep. Bachmann has come to realize that such drastic cuts to veterans health care and disability compensation would have severe negative consequences for veterans who rely on these programs, particularly disabled veterans,” DAV Washington Headquarters Executive Director David W. Gorman said. “We hope to work with her and others to ensure that any efforts to balance the federal budget must first ensure that we fulfill our obligations to care for the men and women who have been injured and disabled while defending this nation,” he said. In a Jan. 28 news release, the DAV had called the ill-advised, unconscionable proposal “nothing short of heartless” and vowed that America’s sick and disabled veterans would not sit idly by while their earned health care and disability benefits are threatened. “Any proposal to freeze VA health care funding would not only freeze out sick and disabled veterans seeking care, it would also end up costing the federal government even more money,” Gorman said. Independent studies have shown the VA system provides safe, high quality health care at an average cost that is less than Medicare, Medicaid or the private sector. “With the number of veterans seeking health care rising, the effect of a freeze would be to either block enrollment of veterans, many of them just returning from battlefields in Iraq and Afghanistan, or to ration care to currently enrolled veterans, including disabled veterans who have relied on VA dating back to World War II,” Gorman said.
-
I may have missed it, but I did not see marine boiler operators on the list.
When I filed for hearing loss and tinnitus, it was first denied by a rating specialist who claimed my MOS was truck driver the four yrs I served at sea.
Make sure to read your denials over carefully.
Testicular Hydrocele
in VA Disability Claims Research
Posted
Length of time from service is a card the VA always likes to play. Fact is you can file for a claim at anytime.
Thirty five yrs after service, I finally recieved some of my medical records. It showed right on my 1971 separation examination that hearing loss was listed as one of the defects. So I filed a claim for it.
I served as a Boilerman for nearly 4 yrs on a WWII tin can. The VARO rater denied by claiming I made a fraudulant statement to a C&P examiner when I claimed my MOS was a boilerman. The VA rater stated my MOS was a truck driver and they through in the length of time since service.
I filed a NOD, and made an appointment with a hearing aide Dr that doesn't charge. He stated it was more than likely due to service. Took it to a local hearing before the VARO and showed the rater my DD214 that shows my rate and nearly 4 yrs sea duty. After he read the IMO, he ordered another exam with a private consultant. That Dr also stated it was service connected.
I was rated 0% for hearing loss and 10% for tinitis
The length of time statement is BS if you have medical evidence to support your claim.
Had they shown me the separation examination results in 1971, I would have filed then. Im not buying the excuse for them to deny on, "length of time since service" , since they concealed favorable evidence from me for over 35 yrs.
My thoughts are, where's the interest?