Top G

I’m a 100% P&T VA disability rated veteran, and in using the VA Disability App, I see that I have a 99% “Unadjusted Disability Rating” also titled as “Unadjusted Aggregate Rating”. My assumption….is that this means no matter what the VA does to my rating, they cannot adjust 99% of my 100% rating. Please advise.

I thought I'd responded to this earlier this morning.... At any rate, I did follow the VA's rule, and did not have to attend their C&P Exams as I already submitted my DBQs and all medical records from the VA and outside Doctors. You must not have read my follow-on with regards to the final outcome of my claim.

As a follow-up with the final decision of my claim, without attending the VA's C&P exams....I did receive an increase in my VA service-connected disability rating from 90% to 100% P&T with backpay. I do appreciate all the help I received along the way. Semper Fi!

All 6 of my recently submitted DBQs are for SC rated medical conditions from 2009, which have gotten worse as documented by my VA doctors and outside doctors. A medical doctor filled out all 6 forms in their entirety. I think this is why I’m so frustrated. I recall for my initial 2009 ratings it took so long with all the medical appointments and taking so much time off from my new job…just not ready to do this all over again for what I feel has already been done through the past 13-years of documentation and DBQs. I’m just ready to tell them enough already. Just go off what I’ve filed.

I’m a retired US Marine of 20-years service, and currently have a 90% service connected disability rating as of 2009. Last week I submitted my 6 BDQs for an increase in my disability compensation. Within a day of my submission of VA forms, they evidently reviewed all 6 DBQs and are now asking that I schedule for C&P exams through VES. Can I tell the VA that I do not want to go to their exams and ask that they review my claims of my DBQs signed by a medical doctor…and use my submitted medical records from both my outside doctors and VA doctors? I just feel like it’s not necessary as I’ve already done what was initially asked and don’t want this taking even longer of a time. I feel they have all they need to base their judgement. Appreciate input/recommendations from those more knowledgeable on this than I am.

I have made the decision to move forward in using 360 Veteran to help me with the DBQs and going through Ree Medical for my evaluations. Last week I filed my Intent To File. I'll be sure to report back with my experience in working with them, and on the VA's final decision in about another 3-6 months...

Thank you @broncovet.

I'm working on filing a new claim to raise my current ratings on a few of my disabilities. With that, where can I file the VA rules that states the use of third-party medical firms/Doctors that can or must be used? I'm looking at going through Ree Medical Inc to evaluate and seek amendment of my current disability rating from 90% to 100%. From what I understand, though not read it in any VA official documentation, is that the Veteran does not need to use a VA contracted medical doctor....but would need to use a board certified Doctor. I want to see the VA rule(s) on this in black and white for myself. So, if any of you can help point me to whatever document this is in and if you can help narrow down the location of it within the rules "book", I'd appreciate it. Thank you all for your help on this.

Ouch! I did my research on 360Veteran, but I hadn't run into any negativity on them. They also have an https secure site. I even went to the BBB and see that they are 5 star rated: https://www.bbb.org/us/oh/fairborn/profile/veterans-organizations/360-veteran-0322-53909 In talking with them, the $1,995 fee is for the use of their doctors and it's not 360 Veteran's fee they receive. They use Ree Medical for their client's: https://www.reemedical.com 360 Veteran however does charge an optional $500 if you'd like their "DBQ 1-on-1 Coaching & Writing Assistance". Now, if you're referring to The VA "Claims" Insider, then for 4-years with the BBB they've had quite a few claims against them: https://www.bbb.org/us/tx/austin/profile/education/va-claims-insider-0825-1000147739/complaints

Thank you....I just got off the phone with the VA and they informed me that it doesn't make since for me to apply for CRSC. I'm a 20-year active duty retired Marine rated at 90%. So, I'm received my 90% disability concurrently with my full retirement pay. From what I gathered on the phone call with the VA, CRSC is for disabled veterans receiving less than 50% disability.

Thank you! I pulled up my letter from the VA on their findings from 2009 and have pasted the TBI portion. Not sure if this answers your questions entirely, but can surely appreciate you help me @Berta. 9 & 10. Service connection for traumatic brain injury with cognitive impairment. Service connection for traumatic brain injury with cognitive impairment has been established as directly related to military service. Your service treatment records were reviewed. Records show that you suffered a head injury after an unknown object hit you during June 1990. Further records during March 1992 noted that a grenade round blew-up while you were shooting it and you suffered facial lacerations. Your exit examination indicates TBI. Your QTC examinations were reviewed. A TBI examination was completed on November 27, 2009. The examiner diagnosed TBI and indicated that your head injury was a diffuse axonal injury and the condition has stabilized. The examiner also diagnosed cognitive impairment and indicated that it was at least as likely as not to do with your TBI. Further examination for your TBI condition was completed on November 30, 2009 and February 2, 2010 and the facets of your condition were examined. The evaluation assigned is based upon the highest level of severity for any facet of cognitive impairment and other residuals of traumatic brain injury (TBI) not otherwise classified as determined on examination. Only one evaluation is assigned for all the applicable facets. A higher evaluation is not warranted unless a higher level of severity for a facet is established on examination. Physical and/or emotional/behavioral disabilities found on examination that are determined to be residuals of traumatic brain injury are evaluated separately. A level of severity of "I" has been assigned for the Memory, attention, concentration, executive functions facet, indicating that an examiner has found evidence such as a complaint of mild loss of memory (such as having difficulty following a conversation, recalling recent conversations, remembering names of new acquaintances, or finding words, or often misplacing items), attention, concentration, or executive functions, but without objective evidence on testing. A higher level of severity of "2" is not warranted unless an examiner finds evidence such as objective evidence on testing of mild impairment of memory, attention, concentration, or executive functions resulting in mild functional impairment. A level of severity of "0" has been assigned for the Judgment facet, indicating that an examiner has found evidence of normal judgment. A higher level of severity of "l" is not warranted unless an examiner finds evidence of mildly impaired judgment, including symptoms such as for complex or unfamiliar decisions, occasionally unable to identify, understand, and weigh the alternatives, understand the consequences of choices, and make a reasonable decision. A level of severity of "0" has been assigned for the Social interaction facet, indicating that an examiner has found evidence that social interaction is routinely appropriate. A higher level of severity of "1" is not warranted unless an examiner finds evidence that social interaction is occasionally inappropriate. A level of severity of"0" has been assigned for the Orientation facet, indicating that an examiner has found evidence such as always oriented to person, time, place, and situation. A higher level of severity of "1" is not warranted unless an examiner finds evidence such as occasionally disoriented to one of the four aspects (person, time, place, situation) of orientation. A level of severity of "0" has been assigned for the Motor activity (with intact motor and sensory system) facet, indicating that an examiner has found evidence of motor activity normal. A higher level of severity of "l" is not warranted unless an examiner finds evidence such as motor activity normal most of the time, but mildly slowed at times due to apraxia (inability to perform previously learned motor activities, despite normal motor function). A level of severity of "0" has been assigned for the Visual spatial orientation facet, indicating that an examiner has found evidence of normal. A higher level of severity of "l" is not warranted unless an examiner finds evidence such as mildly impaired. Occasionally gets lost in unfamiliar surroundings, has difficulty reading maps or following directions. Is able to use assistive devices such as GPS (global positioning system). A level of severity of "1" has been assigned for the Subjective symptoms facet, indicating that an examiner has found evidence of three or more subjective symptoms that mildly interfere with work; instrumental activities of daily living; or work, family, or other close relationships. Examples of findings that might be seen at this level of impairment are: intermittent dizziness, daily mild to moderate headaches, tinnitus, frequent insomnia, hypersensitivity to sound, hypersensitivity to light. A higher level of severity of "2" is not warranted unless an examiner finds evidence of three or more subjective symptoms that moderately interfere with work; instrumental activities of daily living; or work, family, or other close relationships. Examples of findings that might be seen at this level of impairment are: marked fatigability, blurred or double vision, headaches requiring rest periods during most days. A level of severity of "O" has been assigned for the Neurobehavioral effects facet, indicating that an examiner has found evidence of one or more neurobehavioral effects that do not interfere with workplace interaction or social interaction. Examples of neurobehavioral effects are: irritability, impulsivity, unpredictability, lack of motivation, verbal aggression, physical aggression, belligerence, apathy, lack of empathy, moodiness, lack of cooperation, inflexibility, and impaired awareness of disability. Any of these effects may range from slight to severe, although verbal and physical aggression are likely to have a more serious impact on workplace interaction and social interaction than some of the other effects. A higher level of severity of" 1" is not warranted unless an examiner finds evidence of one or more neurobehavioral effects that occasionally interfere with workplace interaction, social interaction, or both but do not preclude them. A levelo f severityo f "0" has been assigned for the Communication facet, indicating that an examiner has found evidence such as able to communicate by spoken and written language ( expressive communication), and to comprehend spoken and written language. A higher level of severity of "1" is not warranted unless an examiner finds evidence such as comprehension or expression, or both, of either spoken language or written language is only occasionally impaired. Can communicate complex ideas. The evaluation assigned for cognitive impairment and other residuals of TBI not otherwise classified is based upon the highest level of severity for any facet as determined by examination. Only one evaluation is assigned for all the applicable facets. NOTE: 38 CFR 4.130 Schedule of ratings pertaining to mental disorder only allows for a single evaluation to be assigned for mental disabilities as the same criteria is used to determine the evaluation to be assigned for these conditions.

My brain injury occurred back in the 90s from a 40mm HEDP round exploding from my 40 MK19 machine gun. Blew me back and unconscious for a bit where I lost my eyesight for a short period, received small burns to my face and lost my hearing for a bit. It is well documented in my medical record book as I also had some follow ups. Since then, it's been documented with my bad headaches that come on where I take Zolmigtriptan for and continuation of floaters in my eyes. Really did shake my head how my TBI was rated so low initially, but I haven't done anything about trying to get it raised ever since.

Thank you so much for the breakdown. Do you have any thoughts on the 360 Veteran (https://the360veteran.com/)? I'm just exhausted in even thinking about doing this on my own....this is a big reason why I've not submitted previously to seek a higher rating. Really just hurts my head and I'm at a point to where I'm willing to pay a reputable outfit to help me.

360 Veteran - Has anyone used them in filing a claim from here? If so, how was your experience? https://the360veteran.com/

Thank you for the informative information and links. I've also updated my initial post with my 2009 VA decision letter so you and others can see where they rated me.