entropent

Your denial stated, "The braces that were issued to you by this prosthetic department are designed to not cause wear and tear to the clothing, even when worn for an extensive amount of time. Therefore we must deny your claim for clothing allowance based on this reason." Back when you were approved for the clothing allowance, the decision was still the responsibility of the RO. If the record showed that prosthetics issued some type of device for a service connected knee (for example), the rater would have no way to know if you were issued a simple elastic knee sleeve or a high speed unloader brace. He would therefore not be able to tell if the type of brace was designed not to cause wear and tear on the clothing, and would routinely approve the claim. VBA has now delegated the decision making authority to the prosthetics departments precisely because they are the ones who can make that determination. A lot fewer vets get clothing allowance now.

VBA does not require a release of information to obtain Social Security records, as they are in Federal custody. When you apply for IU, SHARE is queried to determine if you are in receipt of SS disability. If you are, the VSR simply faxes a request to the SS office of jurisdiction. (Usually it takes a second request to get the records). There is information sharing between Federal agencies routinely. VA periodically runs a query of IRS records for vets in receipt of income-dependent benefits (NSCP).

not under the table VI or VIa criteria. you almost have to be deaf as a post to get a compensable rating for hearing loss.

$1500 plus shipping! The last Bash opinion I saw was lame; too easy to rip apart. Bet my vet was pissed! But hey, whatever gets you the shekels. It's all about the shekels.

no it is not a gaf score. a mental health screen is not a diagnosis. the gaf (global assessment of functioning) will be assigned in conjunction with a confirmed diagnosis.

I've seen Dr. Bash's work. I wouldn't pay money for it. He's basically got a fill-in-the blank system, quotes a few easily refutable cites, and makes unsupportable conclusions. How much does he charge?

IMHO, there should never be a case where an attorney is needed. There is enough info and support on this site to permit the vet to prosecute his own claim. All a lawyer does is take a cut of your back pay. Do a little digging around in the regulations, and you can get a feel for the system. It's not rocket science. Lawyers always slow down the process, as do Congressionals.

I wouldn't bother to send in copies of regulations, your rater has them all on his desk. In my humble opinion, some of the advice on this forum is counter-productive. Why on earth would you send the DRO a copy of his job description? Why would you waste your time sending in regulations that the rater already knows? What is the point? To show that you know what you are doing? They know what they are doing as well. And you are more likely than not to antagonize him/her. More than a few raters read some of the rude stuff some vets write and think, "Screw this jerk. I'll deny him and let him appeal." Once the rater makes a decision, whether it is correct or not, you are the one who has to wait months or years for it to get straightened out. In fact, I wouldn't be surprised if some of the know-it-all old-timers on this forum have had just that problem with their files. Plus, when you send multitudes of duplicate records in, your file gets bigger and bigger, until the rater takes one look and says, "That one looks like a huge dog, and I will put it off for later. Much later." The trick is to keep your communications clear, short, and sweet. You want the rater to think your case is going to be a "quick hit." Don't send in copies of material you know is already in the file, just mention it and let the rater look for it. If you want a particular regulation considered, cite it in your statement and let it go. And, for God's sake don't highlight your records. It's obnoxious. Just a humble opinion from the other side of the wall.

It doesn't matter how many diagnoses you have for your low back, they will all be counted as one disability. This is because there is a law against "pyramiding," or using the same symptoms to support separate evaluations. Just like it doesn't matter how many psychiatric diagnoses you have, they will all be evaluated as one disability, so it is with additional diagnoses for the low back. Your back is evaluated based on limitation of motion. An evaluation of 50 percent for the low back is not assigned unless you have no motion at all in the lumbar spine. There is an exception for intervertebral disc syndrome, but you must have been ordered to bed rest by your physician for a number of weeks in the past year. So, a simple additional diagnosis will not warrant a claim for increased evaluation. And if your back does not meet the criteria for a 40 percent evaluation when you are examined for your claim for increase, the rater may try to reduce your 40 percent. So be careful! Also, you indicated that your diagnosis was in your middle back. The entire thoracolumbar spine is considered one disability. So the fact that it is in your middle back will not warrant additional compensation.

(disregard second post, I posted the same message twice by accident)

TS, if NEKOIINU is newly discharged from the military and on TDRL, then there is zero chance that permanency will be conceded at this time. NEKOIINU, since you are not seeing a medical provider, the statement of your C&P examiner, who apparently provided a medical opinion that you are not competent to manage your VA benefits, will prevail. You need another medical opinion to challenge it, a letter from you citing your bills will not do it, because the rater is required to follow the prevailing medical opinion. If you are in Mexico and not under care this is a real problem. Bipolar (or delusional disorder with paranoia, if you prefer) is a serious condition and requires medication. You need to see someone. You are willing to report to the Regional Office for a hearing, so why not report to the VA hospital for treatment? And that way you can get a competing medical opinion for your incompetency.

donews, it is absolutely worth it for your brother to submit a claim for benefits, and do it as soon as possible. You didn't say when your brother was in the military, but the older the case is the less likely it is to have a record of any line of duty investigation. His emergency treatment records may show that he was intoxicated, and that would mean the rater would refer the case to the adjudicator for a formal finding regarding whether benefits could be paid based on the incident. But I don't know too many who have the stomach to deny a badly disabled vet based on a single episode of intoxication. It may be different if he was treated in service for alcohol abuse, but in any case it is definitely worth a try. It costs nothing to try, and he could very well get some benefits. I hope you can convince him to submit a claim.

I cited the applicable parts of your post. In decision number 14, a finding of incompetency has been proposed. That is different from a final action. They are giving you a 60 day period of time to disagree with the proposed action. They will not pay you until the final action is taken, and a guardian is set up for you, and then they will pay the guardian, not you. It could take a minimum of 120 days for you to see any money at all. If I were you I would not permit the finding of incompetency to become final without a fight. To fight it, you would write a letter stating that you "disagree with the proposed finding of incompetency" (use those words) and then go to your mental health care provider and ask for a statement from them which indicates that you are "competent to manage your VA benefits" (again, use those words). Then submit the statement as soon as you can, but certainly within 60 days of the date on the letter you just received. Just as I suspected, you are totally disabled, but not permanently. You will have to undergo a review examination at some time in the future in order to determine if you still warrant an evaluation of 100 percent. That review examination can be scheduled any time from one to five years in the future. It will be just like the examination you underwent for your current evaluation, and it will help your case if you are not working while you are 100 percent.

Looks like what happened is they have found you totally, but not permanently, disabled. As the last poster has noted, you may disagree with the proposed incompetency, and you need to do that within 30 days. They will not necessarily order another examination, you can avoid that by getting a letter from your doctor stating that you are capable of managing your VA benefits. My concern is the "appointment which will be set at a later date." That means that you are scheduled for a future review examination, and your 100 percent is not permanent. You did not get awarded Chapter 35 did you?

Ricky is right, ADD is a disorder of childhood, and not something one can develop from military service. That said, I have seen ADD service connected. It depends on the rater. All claims are worth a try. But if one has co-existing MDD, I would pursue that, instead. The ADD will not help or hurt the depression claim, since you get only get one evaluation regardless of the number of diagnoses.