Jump to content


  • Content Count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Donations


Community Reputation

1 Neutral

About Scottish_Knight

  • Rank
    E-3 Seaman

Profile Information

  • Location

Recent Profile Visitors

117 profile views
  1. Good morning @Berta, @broncovet, and @pacmanx1, I've read your posts here and the other thread. I appreciate the time you've taken to write your thoughts and ideas. This is the rub: It would seem the VA doctor here in Germany that conducted the exam in September 2009, did not do me right. Moreover, there is no means to counter it. I now have four letters from former colleagues who have written, that between 2002 and 2009, I limped and complained of pain. I appreciate their efforts, but these are not written by medical professionals. They will hold little weight, if at all.
  2. Good morning Berta, I think this is a done issue. I wrote the DAV last night and before I went off to bed, I got this reply, 'it should have been rated higher than 0%. But the way the doctor wrote up the exam didn’t help you at all.' I honest don't see a means to fight it. As I understand it, the VA looks at the injury once the individual has retired and is in veteran status. What the doctor wrote holds more weight than any argument I can make. As I didn't do a NOD at the time, there is no means to argue the decision 12 years on. I think it's a done deal. Perhaps I could have
  3. Well, that didn't go as hoped. Reply from DAV on the matter of the German Hospital records. 'There is a couple of places on the 21-526 where additional information was added (different shade of ink). But that in itself isn’t really an issue (other than they didn’t have the STRs). As far as the VA not having the surgical report, that really isn’t an issue, they acknowledged the surgery being in service, the rating was based on the examination of September 10, 2009. Ratings aren’t based on the injury but the residuals of them.' Back to square one.
  4. Berta, when I was a CID special agent in the Army, I worked fraud cases that involved research. Massive amounts. Researching the VA, BVA and CVA is tough, I agree. Try researching the FAR! Regardless, as this was new to me, you and others steered me in the right direction and I have a better handle on it. It's been 12 years since I retired, so my governmental research skills are rusty. Nothing compared to the rest here, and it helped. I never expected to be spoon-fed. Once I had a slight understanding I was able to do some digging on my own, with help of course. The only thing I don
  5. We have it sorted Berta! Thank you very much. I've begun the write up for the DAV and hope to have it out no later than Monday. There are additional points we've raised here along with things I've researched I plan to add. I cannot thank you enough for sticking this out with me. Truly appreciated!
  6. I've looked back over the emails between the DAV and me. Back in March 2020, the DAV had me complete and return to them VA Form 21-4142. So, it would seem the VA had absolutely nothing on the 2001 surgery and failed to ask on it back in 2009.
  7. More interesting by the day.... I just pulled the 21-526 (see, I am organised!). Part B shows a list of the disabilities I claimed back in 2009, under Part 1 of B. But 2-4b are all blank. Someone (not me!) drew a diagonal line across those with 'See STRS'. I assume STRS is Service Treatment Records? There was no Service Treatment Records in my medical file for this. I, too, think we might have found the basis for a CUE. I'm going to write the DAV straight away and see if that is in fact the case. Why did they have me request those particular records, unless the VA did not have th
  8. @Berta, you've raised a very interesting point. I don't believe the VA had the records from the Regensburg University Hospital back in 2009. Now, I could be incorrect in that, but I think not. Last year, either the DAV or the VA had me prepare a sign a document pertaining to obtaining the records from the Regenburg Hospital. There is nothing in my copy of the medical records from that Hospital other than a discharge sheet. In addition, there is nothing from the Wuerzburg MEDDAC other than a form mentioning physical therapy. Correct me if I am wrong, but that wold be considered 'new ev
  9. Good morning, doing more research last night, I discovered something rather interesting. Since 1992, the BVA has made 1,297,220 decisions. This according to their website. Of that number, 22,056 involved gunshot wounds. Of the original number, only 2 involved noncompensable gunshot wounds. In both of those not one argued (be it NOD or CUE) a reverse of the noncompensable rating, but increase for, non-related, matters. So, all 22,056 gunshot wounded veterans (minus 2) were awarded an initial disability rating. That is non-debatable. One criteria for a CUE? Perhaps. The US Court fo
  10. Good evening Berta, lots to go through here. I continue to read CVA and BVA decisions and appeals. While I've yet to discover a 'similar' decision / opinion, I do find two very curious and consistent things. One you've mentioned - 5313. I do have that now, or as of November 2020. Near on each old decision uses that code. For some odd reason, in 2009, my injury didn't. The second and this I find huge, is that in each BVA / CVA decision or opinion, each veteran was given an initial rating from 10% to 80%. Why oh why, did the RO find my injury to be noncompensable? When I do a seach in e
  11. Not do I Berta, nor do I. That case is somewhat close. I too have been researching the Court's opinions in hopes of finding something similar. Nothing so far, but some do come rather close. I've reviewed again the documents I have and I find this, well, rather interesting. From the 2009 Decision Rating, 'A noncompensable evaluation is assigned from 1 June, 2009, the day after discharge, because your claim was received in the VA office within one year of discharge. A noncompensable evaluation is assigned unless there is malunion of the femur with slight knee or hip disability'. At
  12. No disrespect Berta. There is an absolute boat load of information and it's rather confusing, especially when one attempts to absorb it all quickly. My concern was with going through a CUE based appeal route as my next step and skipping others, if it was not in my favour, all is done. It would seem perhaps not. I've heard back from the DAV and they were able to locate my 2009 Rating Decision and I have a copy. The Diagnostic Code from 2009 for my leg (only one entry) was 5255. I've looked briefly at 38 CFR 4.71a. Since the break to the bone is neither malunion nor nonunion, it would se
  13. Good afternoon @Berta, @broncovet, et al., To begin with, I contacted the VA today. I spoke with two very help lads. I was on the hunt for the Diagnostic Codes from 2009. Perhaps not in accordance with VA rules, but one of the VA reps did email (encrypted) the 2020 Diagnostic Codes. The sheet indicates 5313 for the muscle group XIII and 5253 for the femur fracture. I contacted the VA subsequently and asked again for the 2009 sheet. It cannot be faxed and I need to ask for it in writing. Hit and miss. I emailed the DAV to ascertain if they might have a copy of the old sheet. I ha
  14. Thank you @Bertaand @broncovet. I'll ge the form completed and sent. Today, as recommended from a friend and retiree, I contacted the CCK law firm in the US (Rhode Island, I think). I had a chat with them and provided as much detail as possible. There is nothing the can do. I was informed the only hope is a CUE appeal, as you've mentioned many times here Berta. Sadly, the CCK do not do CUE appeals. They recommended the DAV (actually, the recommended a few alternatives, but I'll stick with the DAV. Berta, is there anything specific I need to tell the DAV? Again, I have no new evid
  15. @Berta Good morning. What is a C File and to which law or regulation is 3.156? Thank you.
  • Create New...

Important Information

{terms] and Guidelines