Jump to content

Sponsored Ads

broncovet

Moderator
  • Content count

    9,053
  • Donations

    $50.00 
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    262

broncovet last won the day on January 23

broncovet had the most liked content!

Community Reputation

3,293 Excellent

About broncovet

  • Rank
    E-9 Master Chief Petty Officer

Contact Methods

  • Website URL
    http://

Previous Fields

  • Service Connected Disability
    100
  • Branch of Service
    Navy

Recent Profile Visitors

5,956 profile views
  1. Probably one of the first things you need to do is file a 'substituition of claimant" if you have not already. This will allow you to take his place (when filing claims in his behalf). https://www.va.gov/vaforms/form_detail.asp?FormNo=21P-0847
  2. If you think your doc is not treating you properly, then the proceduare is to request a physician change.
  3. broncovet

    DBQ optional or not

    You are barking up the wrong tree. If your doctor was Veteran friendly, he would have likely already provided medical evidence which would assist your claim. You can lead a horse to water, but you cant make him drink. My suggestion is you find a more "Veteran friendly" doc. You can switch docs, it does not sound like you have a lot of confidence in this doc at least as far as representing your best interests. Rather than twist that doctors arm, I would just switch docotrs and find a more Vet friendly one.
  4. broncovet

    smc i think i have a cue

    We dont know without reviewing your records whether or not you meet the criteria or not. Have you been awarded a "single" 100 percent? If so, this usually means they need to adjuticate SMC S.
  5. broncovet

    I think i am there

    Im not completely sure I understand your question. However, you can check the criteria for the different levels of SMC, and see which one(s) you feel you qualify for. You know your medical history better than we do, so you know better what your chances are. Here is criteria for SMC: https://cck-law.com/news/special-monthly-compensation-explained/
  6. No, that isnt correct. There are many other SMC's you can potentially be awarded. A few examples: SMC L (Aid and attendance) if you need A and A. Loss of use of arms, legs, eyes, etc. Loss of use of a reproductive organ. I have no idea whether you qualify for these or not. All of the above CAN be awarded in addition to SMC S, with or without additiional disability 100 percent's.
  7. broncovet

    Effective date

    Yes, you can dispute the effective date. I can not tell you whether or not it will be successful. The effective date is the later of "facts found" (usually the date the doc said you became disabled) or the date you applied. There are exceptions to this. Here is (perhaps) a problem with what you posted. When you go to the doc, its assumed you go there for TREATMENT, not necessarily to apply for benefits. To "apply for benefits" you have to have 3 things, (back then): 1. The application needs to be "in writing". 2. You have to "show intent" to apply for one or more benefits. 3. You have to "specify the benefit sought". With all this said, your conversation with your doctor "may" have been construed as an application for benefit increase. Its rather complex Veterans law. Due to the amount of retro involved, it may be in your best interest to hire an attorney to seek your earlier date. While the VA does not "advertise" this, make no mistake: A GS7 rating specialist "probably isnt" going to cut you a check for about a half million dollars in retro. This usually happens by a judge, sometimes at the BVA, sometimes at the CAVC level. My suggestion is you send the applicable decisions and information to an attorney experienced in Vetereans law, probably a NOVA attorney. Typically they will charge nothing up front, but 20 percent of your retro. https://www.vetadvocates.org/cpages/sustaining-members-directory Some well known Veteran's attorney's are Hill and Pontoon, CCK law, Ken Carpenter of Topeka Kansas, Chris Attig at Attig Steele. Im pretty sure any of these will "review" your case and decide if they think you have a winnable case. They will want to see your documents, most dont want to just "interpret" YOUR interpretations of the decision, but they would rather read the decision themself and then decide. It should cost you zero for an evaluation, and then you could decide whether: 1. To hire that attorney. 2. To hire a different attorney. 3. To have a VSO represetnt you. 4. To represent yourself. There are also "non attorney" practioners, such as Alex Graham who is very very familiar with VA law, yet does not have a law degree. I would avoid any representation where they require "up front" money. This said, its possible you will need an IMO/IME to win your case, and that practioner will likely want to get paid whether or not you win your claim. I have no idea, for sure, if you need an IMO/IME, but you may need to document that you were unemployable now and back then.
  8. I hate to sound like a broken record, but the decision maker for your claim will likely also check to see if you have met the caluza elements: 1. Current diagnosis. 2. In service event or aggravation. 3. Nexus or doc opinion that one and 2 are related. Its very hard to go wrong if you check your records and make sure all 3 above are present. Dont guess. Read it. To get your records, you can try to get VA to get them for you, by appling and authorizing them to see and read your medical records. If VA can not/will not get your records (even when you cooperate), then you can contact the applicable medical facilities where you were treated and ask for them. You can also maybe get them from NPRS. Unfortunately, some Veterans have (tried) to falsify their records, so VA kind of prefers to get them from NPRS themself, rather than have them sent to you and you send them to VA. Of course, the VA cant just assume because you touched your records, you went throught and whited out stuff and changed them, making them fake. My suggestion is you simply apply for benefits, sign the applicable consent forms, then order a copy of your cfile and see if you think the records are accurate. If they are inaccurate or incomplete, there are procedures for you to amend your records in https://www.law.cornell.edu/cfr/text/38/1.579 If stuff is missing, simply send vA a copy of the missing records.
  9. Well, I pretty much "dont" dispute Berta's opinion, for 3 Great reasons: SHE IS RIGHT. However, Im a big fan of "not making something more difficult than necessary." The Cue "standard of review" is the most difficult to meet, reminding you the benefit of the doubt goes out the window. Reopening, due to 38 cfr 3.156 b or 3.156 c, would "preserve" the benefit of the doubt, and lower the "bar" you must jump over to win. Im not saying . "it isnt CUE", Im saying if you reopen due to new evidence, then the cue standard of review may not be necessary and you may be making things more difficult for yourself. Only a small portion of "errors" rise to the Cue standard of review. That is, not all "errors" are CUE errors. You have to show the error was not only undebatable and not a judgement call, but you also have to show it was outcome determinative and based on the evidence at hand. Lets use an example, and I dont know if this applies or not. In this example, lets say someone in VA messed up, and, for whatever reason "Evidence A" was not in your file. The decision maker renders a decision not considering "evidence a". Well, this is unlikely CUE because the decision maker rendered a decision based on what evidence he had available at that time. The procuedure here is not to file a CUE, because that unfairly does not give the Veteran the benefit of equipose, and instead means his evidence has to be undebatable. In this example, you could win benefits by reopeing due to new and material evidence, but you could get a cue claim denied. One reason for this is because the VA's failure to due the Duty to assist is not cue, but would often be considered "harmless error". It would be your responsibility to show that who ever did not consider this evidence was an "outcome determinative" error. Another example in this same tune is if the VA decision mis spells a word. They leave off an "i". Well, a spelling error would unlikely be outcome determinative, so it would instead be called "harmless error", and not cue. There are many "harmless errors" VA can make and sometimes its hard to know, for sure, if that error would up being "outcome determinative". My suggestion is to try reopening the claim based on new evidence. If this fails, then you can still file a cue motion because there is no time limit on cue motions. The key here is understanding that unadjuticated claim is pending. A claim remains pending until finally adjuticated. There is no time limit. You see, when you reopen a "pending" claim, you get the effective date you opened the claim originally, see 38 cfr 3.156 b. Its about the "pending claim" doctrine, which is somewhat complex. Suffice it to say a claim remains pending until "finally adjuticated". Its possible, or even likely, that a motion for Cue is denied because the claim is pending, as cue errors apply only to finally adjuticated claims. Example: You apply for benfits, VA "forgets about" your claim for 5 years. You get mad and file a Cue. VA denies your Cue claim because they simply say, "Oh, we are working on your claim. We are really sorry (gee isnt that backlog awful?) but we will get to your claim as soon as we can, but must deny your cue, as it isnt a finally adjutciated issue.
  10. Unless you have "actually improved under ordinary conditions of life" the reduction bear can not bite you, since it sounds like you are P and T and have been so for years. It sounds more like you are poking a stuffed bear, and dont let his teeth fool you. The bear is dead, as long as you killed him with P and T. Actual improvement undrer ordinary conditions of life means you did not go back to work. Not every thing with teeth will bite you.
  11. Missing records in your cfile is a huge problem. This has essentially created massive, massive delays in my benefits. If those records missing are significant, and if you are seeking an increase or new compensation, then by all means make a copy of your records and send it in to the evidence intake center. However, I agree with GAstone. Unless you are seeking additional benefits and the missing records are related to that, then dont poke a sleeping bear. If you need that evidence for additional compensation, then by all means send it in. In other words, "poke the bear" only if there is a compelling reason, otherwise, leave him sleep. Making sure your cfile is complete is not a compelling reason to wake up the bear. Getting additional benefits (including one or more SMC's) is a good reason to poke that bear.
  12. The "effective date" is the "effective date your benefits start" and its also the effective date concerning your protections. Forget bout the date of decision. Use the decisions "effective date".
  13. I got mine only when I ordered a compete copy of cfile, aka the "RBA" when you go to the BVA.
  14. Alex Graham addressed this issue: The effective date, is the date for the 20 year protections, not the date of the decision.
  15. Ebenefits is unrelaible. This said, congratulations on your TDIU. Dec may or may not be your effective date. They often put december of the previous year because we often get raises with Cola each year, so your compensation changes and ebenefits often inaccuratly reports the effective date as december of the previous year. By the way, did I mention ebenefits is unreliable?
×

Important Information

{terms] and Guidelines