Jump to content

Sponsored Ads

broncovet

Moderator
  • Content count

    9,222
  • 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

6,049 profile views
  1. broncovet

    VACO shake up

    Yes, it seems to be a move in the right direction, but one thing is troubling: Apparently O Rourke, according to the article, lied to congress. For that, he is made an "advisor" to VA? Why would the VA want a known liar on its advisory panel?
  2. Yes, you can file to reopen due to new and material evidence, 38 cfr 3.156. There is a regulation for just that. You posted, I dont think you understand that you can appeal either SC, disability percentage, or effective date. You would be appealing the disability percentage, by reopening new and material evidence 3.156. I think maybe you are worried that, if you appeal, the VA can take away what you have. The VA and the VSO's LOOOVE it whn you think that way. They want you to be "afraid" of filing for an increase out of fear of a reduction instead. Remeber this acronym: F alse E xpectations A ppearing Real This is what fear is, precisely. The VA can reduce you, yes, if you imporve. And, they can take away benefits if you are a fraud. But they are not gonna take away your benefits because you forgot to send in another doc report that documents additional symptoms.
  3. broncovet

    Employment

    Did your doctor state you "are unable to maintain SGE due to sc conditions?" This is usually what is required, tho someone pointed out that Vets sometimes get benefits to which they are not eligible, as well as the all too familair being denied benefits they deserve. I dont want to sound alarms, but unless you have "overcome" your disabilities and have been able to go to work, you may be at risk for a cue error unless a doctor did, indeed make such a statement. Two famous people who were awarded 100 percent and went back to work are Tammy Duckworth and Max Cleland. The schedule of rating disabilites makes it clear that it means the "average" person would not be able to overcome their disabilities and go back to work, thus exceptional ones may do just that. My opinion is, that if you are working OR CAN work, then you may have to give up TDIU. TDIU is not designed for workers. Social Security also has a "path to employment" for disabled workers. I think Social security gives you a year or so, before they take your social security. VA has something similar. You have to send in a form every year, when you are tdiu, to continue. You certify if, or how much you worked in the last 12 months. If you dont send in that form, your benefits are subject to be taken away. If you lied on the form, that is a no, no. Dont do that. If you are able to work, even part time, then tell them how much you worked, and when. Further, I dont suggest, "pushing the envelope". In other words, work as much as you can, tell VA, and let the chips fall where they may. Dont do stuff like work only 4 months of the year to stay under the povertyl level so you can collect tdiu, when you could work more. The VA has ways of finding out stuff like this, and you dont want to go there. Play it honest, fair and square, or not at all. Its okay to maximize your benefits....but not by lying about your disabilities. Please understand, IM NOT ACCUSING YOU OF LYING. I have no idea of the severity of your disabiliities. Im simply suggesting dont make the mistake of exaggerating your disabilities to collect benefits, including, but not limited to tdiu. Instead, sleep well at night by telling the truth and accurate reporting.
  4. Yes, they can "lower" (reduce) your rating, but its difficult for them, depending upon how long you have been rated. They have to send you a letter proposing the reduction and you can request a hearing to dispute the proposed reduction. Unless yours is a temporary rating, or you have been rated less than 5 years, you have protections, explained here: § 3.344 Stabilization of disability evaluations. (a)Examination reports indicating improvement. Rating agencies will handle cases affected by change of medical findings or diagnosis, so as to produce the greatest degree of stability of disability evaluations consistent with the laws and Department of Veterans Affairs regulations governing disability compensation and pension. It is essential that the entire record of examinations and the medical-industrial history be reviewed to ascertain whether the recent examination is full and complete, including all special examinations indicated as a result of general examination and the entire case history. This applies to treatment of intercurrent diseases and exacerbations, including hospital reports, bedside examinations, examinations by designated physicians, and examinations in the absence of, or without taking full advantage of, laboratory facilities and the cooperation of specialists in related lines. Examinations less full and complete than those on which payments were authorized or continued will not be used as a basis of reduction. Ratings on account of diseases subject to temporary or episodic improvement, e.g., manic depressive or other psychotic reaction, epilepsy, psychoneurotic reaction, arteriosclerotic heart disease, bronchial asthma, gastric or duodenal ulcer, many skin diseases, etc., will not be reduced on any one examination, except in those instances where all the evidence of record clearly warrants the conclusion that sustained improvement has been demonstrated. Ratings on account of diseases which become comparatively symptom free (findings absent) after prolonged rest, e.g. residuals of phlebitis, arteriosclerotic heart disease, etc., will not be reduced on examinations reflecting the results of bed rest. Moreover, though material improvement in the physical or mental condition is clearly reflected the rating agency will consider whether the evidence makes it reasonably certain that the improvement will be maintained under the ordinary conditions of life. When syphilis of the central nervous system or alcoholic deterioration is diagnosed following a long prior history of psychosis, psychoneurosis, epilepsy, or the like, it is rarely possible to exclude persistence, in masked form, of the preceding innocently acquired manifestations. Rating boards encountering a change of diagnosis will exercise caution in the determination as to whether a change in diagnosis represents no more than a progression of an earlier diagnosis, an error in prior diagnosis or possibly a disease entity independent of theservice-connected disability. When the new diagnosis reflects mental deficiency or personality disorder only, the possibility of only temporary remission of a super-imposed psychiatric disease will be borne in mind. (b)Doubtful cases. If doubt remains, after according due consideration to all the evidence developed by the several items discussed in paragraph (a) of this section, the rating agency will continue the rating in effect, citing the former diagnosis with the new diagnosis in parentheses, and following the appropriate code there will be added the reference “Rating continued pending reexamination ___ months from this date, § 3.344.” The rating agency will determine on the basis of the facts in each individual case whether 18, 24 or 30 months will be allowed to elapse before the reexamination will be made. (c)Disabilities which are likely to improve. The provisions of paragraphs (a) and (b) of this section apply to ratings which have continued for long periods at the same level (5 years or more). They do not apply to disabilities which have not become stabilized and are likely to improve. Reexaminations disclosing improvement, physical or mental, in these disabilities will warrant reduction in rating.
  5. broncovet

    Hearing

    I agree with Hamslice. The doctor saying he will "re evaluate" is not the same as saying you are getting a VA benefit re evaluation exam. The doctor is "treating" your symptoms. Trying to get you better. The VA is evaluating your disability percentages, trying to get you worse. The VA is prohibited from reducing your disability percentage unless you have "actual improvement". I doubt that your hearing has gotten better. But you would be the best one to answer that. Instead of worrying about a VA reduction for hearing loss in a 70 year old hard of hearing Vet, you should focus your worry on something more realistic, such as your house getting sucked up by a sinkhole, or getting struck by lightening. Or, maybe, getting shot by a shooter next time you go to a pizza parlor, or visit a school. If you, by chance, do encounter an armed shooter, I hope one or more of your friends took the CCW classes, and is packing their weapon so they can shoot back. It would be a tragedy if a crazed shooter was the only one armed. We certainly need more citizens with weapons so that , when people go crazy and start shooting, they can get shot back at quickly. The sooner the better. The crazy shooters dont seem to be breaking into Marine Corp or Army Infantry barracks, at least, not without someone shooting back. They prefer unarmed children to shoot at, who dont shoot back. This needs to change, by having more armed citizens, not fewer armed citizens. I do agree, the discrepency between tests is troubling, but it sounds like you have explained that with your tinnitus, and it does not sound like you have any "actual improvement" in hearing loss since your rating.
  6. You gave us very little information. Apparerntly, this disorder is rated upon the severity, and we have no idea how severe yours is. You also did not mention when your decision was, or if you appealed it. If you gave more information, we could better advise you. Ratings for eyes, follows: 4.79 Schedule of ratings - eye. Diseases of the Eye Rating 6000 Choroidopathy, including uveitis, iritis, cyclitis, and choroiditis. 6001 Keratopathy. 6002 Scleritis. 6006 Retinopathy or maculopathy. 6007 Intraocular hemorrhage. 6008 Detachment of retina. 6009 Unhealed eye injury. General Rating Formula for Diagnostic Codes 6000 through 6009 Evaluate on the basis of either visual impairment due to the particular condition or on incapacitating episodes, whichever results in a higher evaluation. With incapacitating episodes having a total duration of at least 6 weeks during the past 12 months 60 With incapacitating episodes having a total duration of at least 4 weeks, but less than 6 weeks, during the past 12 months 40 With incapacitating episodes having a total duration of at least 2 weeks, but less than 4 weeks, during the past 12 months 20 With incapacitating episodes having a total duration of at least 1 week, but less than 2 weeks, during the past 12 months 10 Note: For VA purposes, an incapacitating episode is a period of acute symptoms severe enough to require prescribed bed rest and treatment by a physician or other healthcare provider. 6010 Tuberculosis of eye: Active 100 Inactive: Evaluate under § 4.88c or § 4.89 of this part, whichever is appropriate. 6011 Retinal scars, atrophy, or irregularities: Localized scars, atrophy, or irregularities of the retina, unilateral or bilateral, that are centrally located and that result in an irregular, duplicated, enlarged, or diminished image 10 Alternatively, evaluate based on visual impairment due to retinal scars, atrophy, or irregularities, if this would result in a higher evaluation. 6012 Angle-closure glaucoma: Evaluate on the basis of either visual impairment due to angle-closure glaucoma or incapacitating episodes, whichever results in a higher evaluation. With incapacitating episodes having a total duration of at least 6 weeks during the past 12 months 60 With incapacitating episodes having a total duration of at least 4 weeks, but less than 6 weeks, during the past 12 months 40 With incapacitating episodes having a total duration of at least 2 weeks, but less than 4 weeks, during the past 12 months 20 Minimum evaluation if continuous medication is required 10 Note: For VA purposes, an incapacitating episode is a period of acute symptoms severe enough to require prescribed bed rest and treatment by a physician or other healthcare provider. 6013 Open-angle glaucoma: Evaluate based on visual impairment due to open-angle glaucoma. Minimum evaluation if continuous medication is required 10 6014 Malignant neoplasms (eyeball only): Malignant neoplasm of the eyeball that requires therapy that is comparable to that used for systemic malignancies, i.e., systemic chemotherapy, X-ray therapy more extensive than to the area of the eye, or surgery more extensive than enucleation 100 Note: Continue the 100-percent rating beyond the cessation of any surgical, X-ray, antineoplastic chemotherapy or other therapeutic procedure. Six months after discontinuance of such treatment, the appropriate disability rating will be determined by mandatory VA examination. Any change in evaluation based upon that or any subsequent examination will be subject to the provisions of § 3.105(e) of this chapter. If there has been no local recurrence or metastasis, evaluate based on residuals. Malignant neoplasm of the eyeball that does not require therapy comparable to that for systemic malignancies: Separately evaluate visual impairment and nonvisual impairment, e.g., disfigurement (diagnostic code 7800), and combine the evaluations. 6015 Benign neoplasms (of eyeball and adnexa): Separately evaluate visual impairment and nonvisual impairment, e.g., disfigurement (diagnostic code 7800), and combine the evaluations. 6016 Nystagmus, central 10 6017 Trachomatous conjunctivitis: Active: Evaluate based on visual impairment, minimum 30 Inactive: Evaluate based on residuals, such as visual impairment and disfigurement (diagnostic code 7800). 6018 Chronic conjunctivitis (nontrachomatous): Active (with objective findings, such as red, thick conjunctivae, mucous secretion, etc.) 10 Inactive: Evaluate based on residuals, such as visual impairment and disfigurement (diagnostic code 7800). 6019 Ptosis, unilateral or bilateral: Evaluate based on visual impairment or, in the absence of visual impairment, on disfigurement (diagnostic code 7800). 6020 Ectropion: Bilateral 20 Unilateral 10 6021 Entropion: Bilateral 20 Unilateral 10 6022 Lagophthalmos: Bilateral 20 Unilateral 10 6023 Loss of eyebrows, complete, unilateral or bilateral 10 6024 Loss of eyelashes, complete, unilateral or bilateral 10 6025 Disorders of the lacrimal apparatus (epiphora, dacryocystitis, etc.): Bilateral 20 Unilateral 10 6026 Optic neuropathy: Evaluate based on visual impairment. 6027 Cataract of any type: Preoperative: Evaluate based on visual impairment. Postoperative: If a replacement lens is present (pseudophakia), evaluate based on visual impairment. If there is no replacement lens, evaluate based on aphakia. 6029 Aphakia or dislocation of crystalline lens: Evaluate based on visual impairment, and elevate the resulting level of visual impairment one step. Minimum (unilateral or bilateral) 30 6030 Paralysis of accommodation (due to neuropathy of the Oculomotor Nerve (cranial nerve III)). 20 6032 Loss of eyelids, partial or complete: Separately evaluate both visual impairment due to eyelid loss and nonvisual impairment, e.g., disfigurement (diagnostic code 7800), and combine the evaluations. 6034 Pterygium: Evaluate based on visual impairment, disfigurement (diagnostic code 7800), conjunctivitis (diagnostic code 6018), etc., depending on the particular findings. 6035 Keratoconus: Evaluate based on impairment of visual acuity. 6036 Status post corneal transplant: Evaluate based on visual impairment. Minimum, if there is pain, photophobia, and glare sensitivity 10 6037 Pinguecula: Evaluate based on disfigurement (diagnostic code 7800). Impairment of Central Visual Acuity 6061 Anatomical loss of both eyes 1 100 6062 No more than light perception in both eyes 1 100 6063 Anatomical loss of one eye: 1 In the other eye 5/200 (1.5/60) 100 In the other eye 10/200 (3/60) 90 In the other eye 15/200 (4.5/60) 80 In the other eye 20/200 (6/60) 70 In the other eye 20/100 (6/30) 60 In the other eye 20/70 (6/21) 60 In the other eye 20/50 (6/15) 50 In the other eye 20/40 (6/12) 40 6064 No more than light perception in one eye: 1 In the other eye 5/200 (1.5/60) 100 In the other eye 10/200 (3/60) 90 In the other eye 15/200 (4.5/60) 80 In the other eye 20/200 (6/60) 70 In the other eye 20/100 (6/30) 60 In the other eye 20/70 (6/21) 50 In the other eye 20/50 (6/15) 40 In the other eye 20/40 (6/12) 30 6065 Vision in one eye 5/200 (1.5/60): In the other eye 5/200 (1.5/60) 1100 In the other eye 10/200 (3/60) 90 In the other eye 15/200 (4.5/60) 80 In the other eye 20/200 (6/60) 70 In the other eye 20/100 (6/30) 60 In the other eye 20/70 (6/21) 50 In the other eye 20/50 (6/15) 40 In the other eye 20/40 (6/12) 30 6066 Visual acuity in one eye 10/200 (3/60) or better: Vision in one eye 10/200 (3/60): In the other eye 10/200 (3/60) 90 In the other eye 15/200 (4.5/60) 80 In the other eye 20/200 (6/60) 70 In the other eye 20/100 (6/30) 60 In the other eye 20/70 (6/21) 50 In the other eye 20/50 (6/15) 40 In the other eye 20/40 (6/12) 30 Vision in one eye 15/200 (4.5/60): In the other eye 15/200 (4.5/60) 80 In the other eye 20/200 (6/60) 70 In the other eye 20/100 (6/30) 60 In the other eye 20/70 (6/21) 40 In the other eye 20/50 (6/15) 30 In the other eye 20/40 (6/12) 20 Vision in one eye 20/200 (6/60): In the other eye 20/200 (6/60) 70 In the other eye 20/100 (6/30) 60 In the other eye 20/70 (6/21) 40 In the other eye 20/50 (6/15) 30 In the other eye 20/40 (6/12) 20 Vision in one eye 20/100 (6/30): In the other eye 20/100 (6/30) 50 In the other eye 20/70 (6/21) 30 In the other eye 20/50 (6/15) 20 In the other eye 20/40 (6/12) 10 Vision in one eye 20/70 (6/21): In the other eye 20/70 (6/21) 30 In the other eye 20/50 (6/15) 20 In the other eye 20/40 (6/12) 10 Vision in one eye 20/50 (6/15): In the other eye 20/50 (6/15) 10 In the other eye 20/40 (6/12) 10 Vision in one eye 20/40 (6/12): In the other eye 20/40 (6/12) 0 1 Review for entitlement to special monthly compensation under 38 CFR 3.350. Ratings for Impairment of Visual Fields Rating 6080 Visual field defects: Homonymous hemianopsia 30 Loss of temporal half of visual field: Bilateral 30 Unilateral 10 Or evaluate each affected eye as 20/70 (6/21) Loss of nasal half of visual field: Bilateral 10 Unilateral 10 Or evaluate each affected eye as 20/50 (6/15) Loss of inferior half of visual field: Bilateral 30 Unilateral 10 Or evaluate each affected eye as 20/70 (6/21) Loss of superior half of visual field: Bilateral 10 Unilateral 10 Or evaluate each affected eye as 20/50 (6/15) Concentric contraction of visual field: With remaining field of 5 degrees: 1 Bilateral 100 Unilateral 30 Or evaluate each affected eye as 5/200 (1.5/60) With remaining field of 6 to 15 degrees: Bilateral 70 Unilateral 20 Or evaluate each affected eye as 20/200 (6/60) With remaining field of 16 to 30 degrees: Bilateral 50 Unilateral 10 Or evaluate each affected eye as 20/100 (6/30) With remaining field of 31 to 45 degrees: Bilateral 30 Unilateral 10 Or evaluate each affected eye as 20/70 (6/21) With remaining field of 46 to 60 degrees: Bilateral 10 Unilateral 10 Or evaluate each affected eye as 20/50 (6/15) 6081 Scotoma, unilateral: Minimum, with scotoma affecting at least one-quarter of the visual field (quadrantanopsia) or with centrally located scotoma of any size 10 Alternatively, evaluate based on visual impairment due to scotoma, if that would result in a higher evaluation 1 Review for entitlement to special monthly compensation under 38 CFR 3.350. Ratings for Impairment of Muscle Function Degree of diplopia Equivalent visual acuity 6090 Diplopia (double vision): (a) Central 20 degrees 5/200 (1.5/60) (b) 21 degrees to 30 degrees (1) Down 15/200 (4.5/60) (2) Lateral 20/100 (6/30) (3) Up 20/70 (6/21) (c) 31 degrees to 40 degrees (1) Down 20/200 (6/60) (2) Lateral 20/70 (6/21) (3) Up 20/40 (6/12) Note: In accordance with 38 CFR 4.31 , diplopia that is occasional or that is correctable with spectacles is evaluated at 0 percent. 6091 Symblepharon: Evaluate based on visual impairment, lagophthalmos (diagnostic code 6022), disfigurement (diagnostic code 7800), etc., depending on the particular f
  7. I think you are asking about a possible effective date, if awarded. We really can not determine that without reviewing your file. However, I suggest you apply and file a nod disputing the effective date, if awarded at an incorrect effective date. Sadly, tho, its rare when you can get an effective date earlier than when you applied, and it takes special circumstances, such as a Nehmer class Vet (Vietnam) or if you applied within a year of service. Its still possible tho, you have an informal claim, and we wont know that unless your records are reviewed.
  8. Mike, I have no idea if your attorneys ignored this, or maybe they just did not tell you, and DID have your back. You should find out in a few months or so. This attorney no longer represents me, as I "won" a remand at cavc, got most of my attorney fees paid by EAJA. Then, the remand decision happened and I "won" but was not satisfied with the effective date of that board decision. Julie Glover elected not to repesent me (again), so I hired Chris Attig, instead, since I was again, at the cavc level. I have now been represented by 3 attorneys, tho not by choice. One, the NVLSP, 2 Julie Glover, and 3, Chris ATTIG. My experience has been that attorneys do very little or no "hand holding". They are not our counselors, they dont write us long emails detailing a rebuttal to our newest entitlement theory we sent them. While we may not think so, they dont make all that much money. I think Julie billed EAJA for about 30 hours of attorney time. That was not near enough. My cfile was at least 1500 pages long. JUst to read that, if you can read a page in 2 minutes, is 50 hours. (Its a very fast reader to read a page in 2 minutes) This is not to prepare a brief, not to do anything..just read my file. So, she had to have done a lot of work and not get paid for it. Lots of it. I dont know about you, but I dont like working and not getting paid...for all my hours. (Whatever the hourly rate is) You probably also wanted to get paid for all your hours worked when you worked by the hour. So, I did/do not get a lot of handholding and they dont send me a letter then discuss ramp on the phone for an hour. No. They simply just do what they think is best. I dont blame them. I dont call every Veteran and explain every thing to them either. I tell them to go to hadit, read all they can, if their question is not answered I will try to get to their question, but others might instead. Im glad others answer questions. VA law is not all that lucrative. At least one attorney I met "no longer does Vets benefits". Why? Well would you like to work for a man and then "maybe" get paid 5 years later? Its no wonder so few want to do Vets law. Anyway, Chris Attig is also extremely busy and does not return every call and answer every time I ask him if he thinks this or that will fly. I read his brief he filed for me, and it was very very good, and he described my claim way better than I could. So did Julie. I suggest you "hang in there"..with RAMP, you will likely know something maybe by the end of this year. I am glad at least one attorney recommends RAMP, as most dont like it. You will like it also, if you get some retro, even if you still have to appeal effective dates or whatever. Anything is better than waiting 5 more years on an appeal in my opinion.
  9. broncovet

    Claimed Denied

    Welcome to the "group" of about 85 percent of Veterans who are denied on their first time claim! (Only about 15 percent of first time claimants are awarded benefits). Is it fair? No. What to do about it? TWO words: Appeal and persistence. Those work when other stuff, like quitting, fails. Most of us who have been awarded benefits have been denied multiple times. I think I counted 12 denials in the since 2002, when I first applied. However, I have been awarded 100 percent and am now appealing the effective date, and Im close to done. What should you do? File a NOD disputing these denials. Order your cfile, and make sure you have all 3 Caluza elements. Get those, if you dont have them documented.
  10. I will start, with some general information about RAMP. You may, or may not get a letter from VA asking you to opt in to RAMP. You can still opt in anyway, by completing this form: https://benefits.va.gov/BENEFITS/docs/appeals-RAMP-Opt-in-form.pdf and sending it to the address on the form. Currently, you have to make a choice: 1. Higher level review. Use this option if you dont have new evidence, but think the decision maker erred on your claim. 2. Supplemental claim lane. Use this option if you have new "relevant" evidence. I personally opted into RAMP about a week ago, after procrastinating a while. Why did I do this: My claim was from 2015. I checked on vets.gov and there are more than 148,000 Claims ahead of me AFTER waiting 3 years. And, my claim has "not" been certified to the Board, so that is another 773 MORE days, according to the BVA chairmans report, here: For 2017: https://www.bva.va.gov/Chairman_Annual_Rpts.asp This means if I stay in legacy appeals (and dont opt into RAMP), that I estimate it will take 5 or six MORE YEARS. Waiting "another" 5 years is unacceptable to me in any circumstances. So, I opted into ramp against the advice of my attorney. Why? Because I have a reasonable chance of getting my appeal done in 125 days, that the VA promises. The attorneys always say, "there are too many unknowns in RAMP". Well there are at least 5 unknowns in legacy appeals: 2018, 2019, 2020, 2021, and 2022. I would rather get denied in 2018 (so I can appeal ) than to wait until 2023, or later, and still maybe not get my benefits and still have to appeal.
  11. On July 31, 2018 I was granted an earlier effective date back to 2007 to 2014 (that when I got my 70% and got my TDIU ). The judge sent my file back to my local RO office, granting me to 2007 and remanded for an earlier effective date for TDIU. when would I get my retro?

  12. Like the rest of us, you will just have to wait for the decision, and not rely upon ebenefits or our estimates. Howver, based on being an optimist, congratulations!
  13. Maybe. You know your symptoms better than I do, and you can look up the schedular rating criteria for each, and compare your symptoms (only those which are documented in your cfile!!) with the criteria. However, I did not read in your post where your doctors said the magic words. Without these magic words, none of this means anything. The magic words are : (drum roll): Either: A. Your (current diagnosis) is "at least as likely as not" due to (in service event or aggravation). OR B. Your (CURRENT DIAGNOSOS) IS secondary to (an already service connected condition). If your doc does not say the "magic words", then SC is a no go. The magic words are known as the Caluza element trio, and are required for service connection. Many a Vet, and many a VSO, has overlooked the basics of Caluza and wound up with a denial. However, people who read hadit, are not often fooled by this, because I repeatedly tell people to mind your Caluza's or get denied.
  14. You posted: A C and P isnt given every time. It wont be given if there is a) already medical evidence to support service connection b) OR it also wont be given if a c and p exam wont change the outcome. If you are lacking an "in service event", for example, a c and p exam wont provide that. YES, waiting drives us crazy. This is why I recently opted into RAMP, even tho my attorney advised against it. He said, "there are too many unknowns" in RAMP. Well, IMHO, the BIGGEST issue is WHEN. A legacy appeal to the BVA is taking about 6 years now. At least. I checked and my 2015 appeal hasnt yet been certified to the board (which takes 773 days, according the the BVA chairmans report), and there are over 140,000 Vets ahead of me in line..that is after I have already waited 3 years. Given that it will take me another 4 or 5 MORE years, this is totally unacceptable to me in every way. Even a denial is better, because I can appeal a denial and, at least, not be stuck in a VA "delay mud hole" for 7 years with legacy appeals.
×

Important Information

{terms] and Guidelines