Jump to content


Senior Chief Petty Officer
  • Content Count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

  • Donations


pacmanx1 last won the day on October 1

pacmanx1 had the most liked content!

Community Reputation

948 Excellent


About pacmanx1

  • Rank
    E-8 Senior Chief Petty Officer

Previous Fields

  • Service Connected Disability

Recent Profile Visitors

The recent visitors block is disabled and is not being shown to other users.

  1. Just think your claim goes to BVA after being denied by the local VARO and BVA grants your claim and remands it back to the local VARO, only to have them low ball your rating and or screw up your effective date so the veteran has to file a new NOD/appeal/HLR to have them review the evidence. We are talking about years that this has been going on and with each appeal for the exact same condition/disability gets a brand-new docket date and the wheel and the wait starts all over again and again.
  2. This is typical local VARO BS, they try to state that the veterans' condition became service connected at the latest/recent C & P exam or the veteran's increase was noted as of the latest/recent C & P exam. If those are the cases, why would veterans put in a claim. The service connections and or increases are why veterans file for them and not the C & P exams. IMHO always check you Effective Dates. If you disagree then file a NOD and make sure your rating matches your Effective Dates. These are ways that VA can cheat veterans out of some of their retro payments and benefits.
  3. I believe you are talking about the "LEGACY CODES PAGES". You can call and ask PEGGY but make sure they know that you are not asking for an audit of your records, you just want a copy of your last rating decision including the legacy code pages. The LEGACY CODE PAGES list all your service connected and non-service connected conditions.
  4. IMHO, I would suggest the same as Bronco, have you or your father had any type of accident or injury to your neck/back/spine while on active duty. I was in several minor car accidents, injured my spine, sprained/strained my spinal muscles and slipped and slammed my neck and spine on the ground and when I filed a claim VA denied my claim. After an appeal I was granted service connection. So, the key for me was the injuries I suffered while on active duty. P.S. Yes, the reason why my claim was denied is because a C & P examiner diagnosed me with Congenital Disc disease and then Spinal
  5. Buck, I agree that you are correct. Does the veteran have a copy of his/her original rating decision granting them 100% schedular? It should state that the TDIU is considered/made moot. If the veteran does not have a copy, s/he could request a new copy and go from there. IMHO the 100% schedular rating is the higher rating, but some VA employees and VSOs will not inform veterans of that for whatever reason. The ebenefits generated letter is really a generic letter that may or may not say that the veteran's TDIU is considered/made moot, but the original rating decision should explain a little
  6. First things first, we can only give our opinions here based on our experience. My questions to you are why do you think that VA overrated you? What did your medical evidence show? What did the C & P exam show? Do you fully understand that since you are rated 100% P & T that you can legally work without VA re-evaluating you? There are so many things we need to know to help you make the best decision for you and your family or even your future family. If your 100% P & T is solely due to a Mental Health Disorder, you cannot legally work unless it is in a Sheltered Environment and t
  7. I am fully aware that I am not always right but what must be said must be said. BORNCO, STEVEN13081 OP (Original Post) was on May 14, 2019 and you responded May 15, 2019. He has not responded to your post. WILLIAM HEDERSON posted on October 22, 2020 and GBARMY, BUCK and I responded, and I encouraged him to start a new separate thread. We know very well that effective dates are complicated and earlier effective dates are even more complicated due to what is in the veterans file, what the veteran claimed and if the veteran received a decision, positive or negative. This post is just f
  8. These two points prove that VA considers you as TDIU P & T. You can go to ebenefits and go to documents create a letter and print up your disability letter for your personal copy. Congratulations!! HEY, CHRISTMAS CAME EARLY
  9. Congratulations!! Sorry that you are going through this. HEY, CHRISTMAS CAME EARLY.
  10. IN MY HUMBLE OPINNION (IMHO) when a veteran files for TDIU s/he should file for all service connected conditions. Your PTSD may have not increased and may not prevent you from employment but adding your other ratings may change things. Also if you are receiving SSDI will help your TDIU claim. I agree with BUCK and GBArmy, that you need an IMO and a Voc Rehab specialist opinion that you are unable to do any type of work. If you are drawing SSDI, they use their own Voc Rehab Specialist opinion so that may be half the battle. Some IMOs can cost but if you can get an IMO from your treating VA
  11. I suggest that you start a new separate thread and please give as much information as possible. I agree that it would be rare, but it is not impossible. It really depends on many different variables. Example: If you filed a claim for migraines back in 1998 and was denied and later was granted service connection for migraines then yes it is possible if your medical records/evidence proves that you met that criteria back in 1998 then you will have to file a claim/CUE claim to request an earlier effective date. Back in 1998 VA was denying claims as NOT WELL GROUNDED (NWG) but failed to review
  12. This should not be a big deal, IMHO, I always say that a veteran should always have an IMO/Diagnosis prior to any C & P exam. Furthermore, in my opinion a veteran should always have an IMO/Diagnosis prior to even filing a claim. I am fully aware that symptoms not treatment is the essence of any continuity but if a veteran is having symptoms then s/he would seek treatment which would result in a medical opinion and or diagnosis. To me, it is simply asking VA to deny a veteran's claim if s/he does not have an IMO/Diagnosis. A veteran would never know how a C & P examiner would descri
  13. Please keep in mind that even though our claims are similar, they are quite different in as my claim has been in continued pursuit since 1998. Going back and forth from the VARO and BVA to the CAVC to multiple remands and finally a grant. As for the reduction was 2016 and for the restoration was 2020. Since you are filing an NOD under the new system, I am sure that it should not take that long and you should retain your effective date. My issue is that the VARO is trying their best to avoid paying my 50% retro back to 1998. In my most recent decision, the VARO is still trying to get me to wi
  14. For whatever the reason there are more no proposed reductions coming from the Varo’s and many of them occur during when a veteran file for an increase. As stated in my post earlier it is called “Mischaracterization of Issue(s) on Appeal” which is an improper reduction. This is part of my claim that BVA just granted as an un-adjudicated 1998 award. When I disagreed with my 50% effective date, someone at the VARO decided to try to discourage me from continuing my appeal by illegally decreasing my rating. I continued my appeal and that’s when BVA not only granted the un-adjudicated effective date
  15. Hamslice, you have been around for a while. I will agree that when a veteran reaches 90%, VA rating chart is not veteran friendly and makes it extremely hard for veterans to reach 100% scheduler. Keep in mind that a veteran only needs to reach 95 on the combined rating chart for VA to round up to 100%. The problem is when I was rated 90%, I needed another 40% just to hit that magic number 95. Most veterans will need another 30%, 40%, or 50% depending on the breakdown to hit that 95 on the combined rating chart for VA to round up to 100% scheduler.
  • Create New...

Important Information

{terms] and Guidelines