RBrogen

slander and libel laws vary by state and federal law basically says the individual can say what they want about anyone as long as they are not directing violence against them... at least that is the current status. It may change with the current SCOTUS makeup. This is true with every SCOTUS change.
Legally, it is very difficult to win a case against a platform that allows people to post their opinions, nasty opinions included.
It is very easy to empathize with people who have been slandered and attacked, but in a legal case individuals have a right to free speech under the 5th Amendment. The government cannot mandate what can or cannot be said by individuals in the general public.
Companies can limit speech by employees.
Sites can limit speech by posters.
Individuals can respond to any speech in their hearing or directed at them.
But suing over speech has some very high barriers that only really good attorneys can overcome.
Sites like Hadit generally don't have the legal resources to fight claims in court. Particularly on a regular basis like Yelp does.
Yelp always wins.
I suspect few have.
It takes drive and anger to get to that point and many vets (and people in general) don't feel that they will get any result from it.
Further, individuals rarely act on generalized anger towards government process that has run amuck. We might rant and rave about a problem but taking the steps to drive change involves us actually starting something and then carrying it through. For things that amount to a generalized anger, the motivation is just not there.
You, @Berta , are the exception that proves the rule. When a bee gets in your bonnet, you are willing to launch an all out offensive to destroy that bee. It is one of the things I respect about you.

Federal Law protects platforms that allow people to individually post things from slander. It does take a good lawyer on retainer to keep up with any claims made so it can get expensive.
The reasoning is that the site is just providing a platform not creating the posts themselves. People have a legal right to say or post their opinion on any topic. That is how Yelp survives legal challenges, 4chan, reddit, etc rely on the same federal laws.
The sites like Rate your MD that don't have a membership fee, make money off of advertising and tracking people who post and just visit the site.

I don't know if there is a place on here or not but is there a place where we can list both good and bad examiners ... for instance in my case the examiner in the Bedford MA VA is HOOOOOORRRRRRRIIIIIIBLLLLLEEEEEE and completely not qualified as proven by my 1 and ONLY C&P there that I documented 14+ errors and even had her boss agree that she f'd up so bad that he asked VA for a new C&P for me.  Conversely, Jamaica Plain VA Hospital in Boston has absolutely the BEST C&P examiners in the area.  They are thorough and veteran friendly.  I've had 3 C&Ps, 3 different examiners, at that location this year alone and EVERY SINGLE ONE has been veteran friendly and each extremely thorough in actually reading my entire file as proven by the pieces of doctors hand written notes that each one found that supported my claim.  That's something you can't just search for because the searches don't pickup hand written items at all or well so it proves that they actually read every single one.

it does and good luck let us know what happens

that sounds like fun 🙂

I have heard of the VA treating a condition noted as a "sympathetic claim" and then adjudicating that with an open claim that discovered it.  They did that with my tinnitus because when I filed it was for "hearing loss" and I got SC and rated at 0 but they noted I had tinnitus and told me to file a claim for it.  I filed the claim and when they adjudicated the claim, they noted that my original claim for hearing loss should have been considered a sympathetic claim for tinnitus and thus approved the earlier effective date for my claim.

I'm actually trying a sympathetic claim on an existing claim and will post the results when they adjudicate the claim.

thanks for responding.
easy responses first.
File for COPD immediately if you have the Caluza Triangle to support the claim
File for Tinnitus if your MOS or Duty Stations exposed you to loud noise or your Caluza event includes likely explosions.
good
not surprising
so you have a decent income now depending on where you live.
PTSD and Migraines are probably good places to ask for increases if you condition matches higher level awards. Look at the Law and the DBQ's to see how they match up to you. Remember that you don't have to have one-for-one exact diagnosis for each level of compensation. medical terms have many analogues so spend time researching those in connection to you conditions.
Now the hard part. there is no definitive path to a sheltered work environment acceptance. It is case by case, just like every rating.
Before starting getting paid, I would suggest getting a clear job description and make sure it is significantly different than any similar job function in the company. Get an offer letter saying how that job is different and created just for you. Get a notarized affidavit stating it was created for you adn will go away if you leave the company or whatever the case is in that context.
I would then go to VocRehab and have them evaluate your ability to do that job in a protected environment. An IMO on this might be your best path, but it is up in the air. On TDIU any hint you can do more than poverty level work is a reason to "review" your TDIU decision. I can envision the VA using it as an attempt to reduce if you use VocRehab to get that letter.
At that point I would start work and wait for them to contact me. It will likely be a letter to reconsider or reduce your award of TDIU. You will be prepared, as far as I can tell,  to respond if you do what i suggested above.

Trying to understand your current situation fully.
You are currently receiving IU. Getting paid at the 100% rate ?
You currently don't earn a taxable income from any other source?
or
You currently earn a taxable income below the annual poverty level boundary in accordance with the provisions governing employment while on IU?
furthermore:
A family friend is willing to create you a position in their company under the auspices of sheltered employment rules in accordance with the laws covering IU & employment.
This position would not exist if you were not there, or would be significantly different if another employee was to be hired to do that job, or would disappear if you left the company?
this job will pay more than the poverty level wage for this year, about 13K?
--------
If that is all correct, then what will happen is once you get paid from this job, and pass the poverty level threshold for income, the VA will (eventually) contact you about the income. Since you are receiving IU the VA monitors your Social Security earnings at some frequency.
They might send you a scary sounding letter about reducing your benefits.
Assuming all those things are in place, and the owner of the business will state in an affidavit (notarize it!) that they created the position for you, blah blah blah, and is willing to deal with the VA red tape for a few minutes, then you are good to go. I would let that person know that as long as you are employed there, and for a little while afterwards, the VA is likely to send requests to validate your employment and that it is sheltered.
One benny you might want to tell your friend is that many states give tax credits to employers that hire disabled vets and will often pay the employer for equipment needed to assist that vet doing their job.
I would suggest calling Peggy and or writing to IRIS and asking what you can do to proactively provide the information to the VA about your protected employment.
-----------------
every veteran contemplates getting bumped to 100% Schedular.
The question is have your conditions worsened to the point you merit that bump.
I have no opinion on if they do or do not. We don't even know what you are rated for.
What I would suggest you do, if this is the path you want to explore, is go read the laws' requirements for each of your conditions. Then get the current DBQ and see what it asks. Evaluate if your conditions have deteriorated to the point of meriting a bump.
If you think they have then look to see if your medical records support your belief.
If your records show your conditions worsening, then file for an increase on each one that does and provide the medical records and lay statements to support the increase.
Be prepared for more C&P exams if you file for an increase.

Favorable decision earlier this month. They corrected their errors. At issue for most of us is the length of time it takes. If this had been properly processed they wouldn't need to pay employees to re-do the claim. 

typo?
rooting for you. The last draft I read look darned good!

You guys ROCK!!!!  I'm making those edits ...
I've also found 38 CFR 3.304(b)(2) to show that the examiner didn't take into consideration that I was Airborne in such that "History conforming to accepted medial principles should be given due consideration."  The fact that they did not consider my Airborne status and that it "IS" a medically known fact that parachuting puts abnormal, traumatic pressure on joints, especially knees, feet, ankles, hips and spine and as a result, chronic disabilities usually follow.

read letter d below.
https://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/38/5109A
38 U.S. Code § 5109A. Revision of decisions on grounds of clear and unmistakable error
(a) A decision by the Secretary under this chapter is subject to revision on the grounds of clear and unmistakable error. If evidence establishes the error, the prior decision shall be reversed or revised.
(b) For the purposes of authorizing benefits, a rating or other adjudicative decision that constitutes a reversal or revision of a prior decision on the grounds of clear and unmistakable error has the same effect as if the decision had been made on the date of the prior decision.
(c) Review to determine whether clear and unmistakable error exists in a case may be instituted by the Secretary on the Secretary’s own motion or upon request of the claimant.
(d) A request for revision of a decision of the Secretary based on clear and unmistakable error may be made at any time after that decision is made.
(e) Such a request shall be submitted to the Secretary and shall be decided in the same manner as any other claim.
(Added Pub. L. 105–111, § 1(a)(1), Nov. 21, 1997, 111 Stat. 2271.)

I do too-
I think the vet's help desk needs a new desk- full of better help-they, or maybe it is one vet,  do not identify themselves as to their expertise. I think they are a few lawyers who practice at the BVA.Or maybe it is just some lawyer wannabee. This is my personal opinion and I never depend on this site.
A "closed " claim is a misnomer.So is their word "final".
Most of my past CUEs for others here as well as for me and my veteran daughter, were filed in my case- within days of getting a decision. The claim was still in the appeal period and thus not closed but still "open."
Most of those decisions were award letters .Those claims were far from being "final."
Some time ago I wrote an article called filing  a GCY claim( Go CUE yourself VA claim )for decisions that a recent and contain legal errors. Some here have certainly succeeded with that advice.Actually I cant think of any member who used that tactic, and who gave us evidence that they had a valid CUE, has ever lost the CUE.
Also you can file CUE on the same decision many times. My 1998 de
cision produced lots of CUEs but like a dope I believed what my so called since -demoted vet rep said- He said you cannot file a NOD because this is a 1151 award.They are different than regular claims.
Years later at my daughter's insistence ( and she was right) I reopened my DIC claim. I had a terrible time with the Buffalo RO who refused at first to even re open the claim. I was also in Military School ( AMU) and wanted to continue my all A average. Being a female civilian in a Military school had a few skirmishes at first- but that's OK.And the VA paid for it all under Chap 35.I had 3 IMos that supported the claim that they refused to read but I chose to be patient and wait for a BVA award. I wanted to get out of that VARO. I kept think my vet rep was wrong so I filed CUEs on the 1998 decision.
The BVA can read and they not only awarded the claim but also agreed with me that my VCAA letter was in violation of the VCAA and rendered that violation as moot due to their award.
However I could have filed CUE under 38 CFR 4.6 then but didnt.I had those 2other CUEs pending there already on the 1998 decision and it took 8-9 years for them to be awarded, I was set for BVA transfer Finally, and happy with that,but then Nehmer 2010 occurred and the Nehmer VARO awarded those CUEs within a few weeks. No wonder my RO hates me. In spite of them, and deficient vet reps, and horrendous posthumous C & P exams, I won all of my claims. I had too. My husband, hours before his very unexpected death, made me promise to see his 1151 claim  and PTSD claim through to the end.He also said to get everything they owed him and me as his widow ,if he died. I sure honored that promise and the other promise He made me make.
They could have awarded his pending claims in his lifetime.
We often have had widows with CUE questions but they must realize that CUEs, as accrued benefits,-the only way a survivor can file a CUE, -rest solely on medical evidence in VA's possession at time of death.
 
 
 
 
 
 

bingo!

Thanks Berta ... I'm actually using highlighter to annotate exhibits so they can't miss where I'm pointing.

it has to be mailed to the RO, Certified Mail Return Receipt Requested. Include all exhibits.
the em dash is the long dash. to type it in Word type two dashes and a letter (no space between the dashes and letter) then hit the space bar. The Word program should automatically put in the em dash as it is a default behavior. 
38 CFR 4.6 – blah blah blah
You did the work. I just provided suggestions on format.
I chose to assist in this way because I feel that if I just wrote it for someone, they don't learn how to understand the formatting. If more people know how to format and decide content, then more people can help future vets learn to be their own best advocate. It is just a skill that has to be honed by use.
I have seen @Berta flooded with CUE questions and she has a ton of irons in the fire. If I can help relieve some of that flood, then I will do so. I feel this is the best way I can help. It is my opinion, that the folks who send in CUE's with a strong format are the best possible resource to assist those future vets.
Beyond the formatting issue, I just don't know all the medical conditions and terms and I really don't have time to devote to reading every page of every vets possible cue claim. I don't many would do have that kind of time and built in knowledge across all possible conditions.
If several of us (many? most?) can point that hypothetical new vet towards getting rid of verbal fluff and concentrate on the legal basis, then that vet can learn from many sources with a consistent message.

It's just a thought. Some of them are pretty cut and dry. I would hope to assume the VA employee who reviews your CUE is a very sharp person with a goal of looking for any possible reason they can find to deny. Don't want to leave anything to chance or a lazy reviewer...

Thanks so much for taking the time to review my information Berta.  It means a lot, as does all of the wonderful feedback.  I'm attaching my latest, hopefully final drat so I can send this over to the Boston RO.  Would you, and anyone else with thoughts on it please let me know what you think about the format and if I'm missing something major.  I don't want to loose the opportunity on a technicality.
 
Cue Motion Draft Sept 8 2019.pdf

Thanks @Buck52, @vetquest, @paulstrgn, and @toddt! Keep fighting the fight!

Had posted a note in another part of the forum but wanted to post here in the success stories.  I had been at 20% for over 20 years and finally decided to fight the fight by filing a claim November 2018.  I was awarded with 80% and a new found education to the VA system.  I had several other conditions cued up and sent in the next volley which was screwed up by a C&P examiner that shouldn't be in the position but I got to 90% in spite of her incompetence.  I fired off a couple of supplemental claims and was awarded 100% P&T backdated to April 18, 2019.  Very thankful for all of the great advice here on Hadit!  Now I've got my eyes on filing a CUE for a bogus rating decision in 1999.
 

Had posted a note in another part of the forum but wanted to post here in the success stories.  I had been at 20% for over 20 years and finally decided to fight the fight by filing a claim November 2018.  I was awarded with 80% and a new found education to the VA system.  I had several other conditions cued up and sent in the next volley which was screwed up by a C&P examiner that shouldn't be in the position but I got to 90% in spite of her incompetence.  I fired off a couple of supplemental claims and was awarded 100% P&T backdated to April 18, 2019.  Very thankful for all of the great advice here on Hadit!  Now I've got my eyes on filing a CUE for a bogus rating decision in 1999.
 

I think that is much better.

This is a claim for CUE, Clear and Unmistakable Error, under provisions of 38 U.S.C. 1111 and 38 CFR 4.6.
Shouldn't this be CUE under 38 CFR 5109A and they violated 38 U.S.C. 1111 and 38 CFR 4.6.

Thanks @Buck52, @vetquest, @paulstrgn, and @toddt! Keep fighting the fight!