broncovet

Read about it here: https://news.va.gov/press-room/veteran-toxins-hazards-serving-eligible-va/ However, perhaps someone could enlighten me. I signed up for VA health care way before Mar. 5. 2024, WITHOUT applying for benefits, and I was not exposed to any of the AO or any of the other Pact Act Stuff.

Read about it here. Its a proposal. Feb. 9, 2024. https://news.va.gov/press-room/va-presumes-exposure-agent-orange-herbicides/

There are 2 timelines, one that starts with the date of your marriage, another which starts with the effective date of your disabilities. (And, of course, the date of death). Hope this helps

This explains it: If this description is true…You may qualify for this benefitAdded monthly amount (in U.S. $) The Veteran had a VA disability rating of totally disabling (including for individual unemployability) for at least the 8 full years leading up to their death, and You were married to the Veteran for those same 8 years 8-year provision342.46 Your widow gets an extra 342. per month if you meet the 8 year provision, explained above. Source: https://www.va.gov/disability/survivor-dic-rates/

Good question. Maybe I can clear it up. The spouse is eligible for DIC if you die of a SC condition OR any condition if you are P and T for 10 years or more. (my paraphrase). More here: Source: https://www.va.gov/disability/dependency-indemnity-compensation/ NOTE: TO PROVE CAUSE OF DEATH WILL LIKELY REQUIRE AN AUTOPSY. This means if you die of a SC condtion, your spouse would need to do an autopsy to prove cause of death to be from a SC condtiond. If you were P and T for 10 full years, then the cause of death may not matter so much.

Ok, since you have been denied, was it within a year? You need to appeal by filing a nod. If you list the reasons and bases from the decision, we can help word the denial.

Yes you are better off either using Precedential CAVC Decisions, Federal Circuit or Scotus Decsions, or you can review board decisions which often cite one of these. Not all CAVC decisions set a Precedent. "Single Judge" CAVC decisions do not set a precedent, while "Panel" or "En Banc" CAVC decisions are precedential. The difference is that a single judge may not speak for the entire court, but a panel of judges, or En Banc (all the available judges) do make up a consensus that is precedential. Pacman is correct that the VA can "whine" and deny a Veteran based upon his argument citing a BVA Decision, arguing its not precedential. VA actually loves to do this, as they are often "getting spanked" by the board, and this is kind of their way of getting even. (Just my guess, I dont work for VA) If you do use a BVA decison, rather than cite the BVA decision, instead, cite the presidential decision cited by the Board.

You can search BVA decisions here: https://search.usa.gov/search?affiliate=bvadecisions Type something relevant to you in the search box such as " granted PTSD non combat".

I think you should appeal this, by filing a NOD, and take it to the BVA (Board of Veterans Appeals). You "may" get it done quicker with a HLR, but my opinion is that would be a waste of time, and you should go directly to the BVA>. You will need to make another choice: 1. Go pro se. (represent yourself) 2. Use a VSO (no cost, but often poorly effective) 3. Hire a lawyer. Most expensive but likely most direct route, as you often wind up hiring an attorney later, anyway. Will likely cost you 20 percent of the back pay. If you dont mind studying, have the time and ressources, you can represent yourself. You may even get lucky and get a great vso from the get go, but that is rare.

Yes. Have you applied and been denied? If you have not applied, then download the form and apply: https://www.va.gov/find-forms/about-form-21-2680/ This will trigger a c and p exam, as a doc will need to confirm you need Aid and attendance. NOTE: ITS ok if you are currently getting aid and attendance from a family member. You can continue to get A and A from a spouse or family member and still receive VA comp for it. Its in the regulations. If you have been denied, you will need to appeal. You need to show you need help with ADL's (Activities of dailiy living, such as eating, going to the bathroom, bathing, cooking, dressing etc.).

Im leery of "programmed in political bias" in AI. (It already programmed into google and other search engines, too). But, this description sounds good. Actually, now that you mention it, I am considering switching to DUCKDUCKGo search engine, because Google is ran by marketing (aka money!) and, if you want a top spot, you pay for it. This may be a reason for hadits traffic being down, other sites, such as VA, has money money money, to pay Google to redirect searches to go to VA controlled websites, for example, not hadit for information. "Hadit answers to google questions is probably buried on page 19, where VA's several websites are probably paid to be on top. This is just a guess". It may not used to have been like that, but money changes people. Its well known google sells "top spots" as ads. And, people often pick one of the top 2 or 3. VA has their own VA.gov, and there is "VAntage point" which is VA ran, and VA bias. After Ted Strickland's passing, I dont think there is much maintenance on VAwatchdog.org, so its numbers are likely down with not much new stuff. VA hated watchdog, they were the one who revealed shreddergate to the public, a massive coverup and embarrassment to VA in 2008. And, I have my doubts if shreddergate has truly ever been fixed, there are mysterious dissappearances of key evidence going on even now. Case in point: Secretary Peake ordered that Veterans be able to (re) submit previously shredded evidence, BUT, they put a time limit on a narrow window of time frame that applies to. There is no evidence that shredding began a few months prior to shredder gate and stopped a few months after, but, Veterans had a narrow 18 month window in 2008 to resubmit shredded evidence. I resubmitted evidence shredded "outside" of this limiited period and was told that, pretty much, because my resubmission did not fall into this limited time frame, it was not valid. The limited time frame was "damage control", because VA had been doing it for decades. Here is what was worse. So, I sent a 21-4138 to VA "Special Handling Request due to mishandled evidence", per Dr. Peake's order, along with evidence resubmissions, in 2008. Incredibly, by 2010, my 21-4138 had mysteriously disappeared from my cfile, when I asked for a copy of my cfile later. So, they "mishandled" the "Special handling request due to mishandled evidence". Now that shows that it was NOT fixed and never was. The VA shreds evidence they dont like. Period.

You dont have to choose!!!!!!! File for OSA both direct (primary) and secondary to any of your SC conditions. Let the doctors/raters do their job and sort it out. HINT: To get it SC, you are gonna need a medical opinion that your sleep apnea is at least as likely as not related to either: A. An event in your military service. OR B. Related to one or more of your SC conditions. I have not read your file and dont know if a doc has provided a nexus, like that above or not. If not, you will need a medical opinion. Buddy letters will help "if" you had an event in service which allegedly caused OSA, such as a face/nose/throat/sinus condition or inujury, or depression or PTSD. There is a strong link of PTSD to OSA, but you have to show that YOUR OSA is related to YOUR PTSD, not just people in the study.

Effective dates are complicated, and, its NOT ALWAYS TRUE that you are not entitled to an effective date earlier than what you file. I will cite "at least 2" exceptions where a claim can be effective Before the filing date: 1. SMC claims. Since SMC is inferred, your effective date is NOT limited to the date filed, but rather, the facts found in that the date the doc first documented you met the applicable criteria. 2. Within a year of exit from service. If you file a claim within a year of exit from service your effective date will be the day after you got out of service. Source: https://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/38/5110

Yea, about 80 percent of first claims at the varo are denied. At least some of these are denied for bogus reasons. A bogus reason is any reason "not" in the criteria. My example: "Its been too long since military service". "Time since military service is not a criteria. Bogus denial. It was overturned upon appeal. However, that took 4 years, and, I lost my home in the process. Most of us have been through something similar. Thus, we have "hadit".

Around 12 to 15 years ago, VA published a brochure about hearing loss. It explained, among other things, that hearing loss leads to depression. There are very good reasons for that, and, I may add its possible, but can be difficult to get MDD secondary to hearing loss. VA did not like the idea of them publishing a book that could be used against them for Vets seeking depression secondary to hearing loss, so they ceased publishing this "hearing loss manual". To get your mdd rated secondary to hearing loss, you will need a nexus, or statement from a doctor that its at least as likely as not that YOUR mdd is related to your hearing loss. Helen Keller, both blind and deaf, explained it rather well. When asked if she could have her vision OR her hearing restored, which would she choose (only one). She said, somewhat suprisingly, she would choose to have hearing restored over her vision. She explains that blindess seperates people from "things" (objects). However, hearing loss seperates people from people. Its well known people isolated and seperated suffer depression, such as those in solitary confinement. Its very depressing to feel alone and isolated, which is what deafness does. As an example, I can not understand my grandchildren at all. They have high pitched voices, and I have no clue what they say, about 70 percent of the time. So, I pretty much can not communicate and can not have a relationship with my grandkids. I watch my spouse, who has a wonderful relationship with our grandkids, because, she can engage them in conversation and I simply can not. Grandchildren dont come with close captioning.

Was your denial within the most recent 12 months? If it was, an appeal would be better than a supplemental claim, relative to the effective date. However, it may not matter "too much" if your hearing loss is rated at zero percent, because a SC hearing loss rated at 0 percent and a denied hearing loss pays at exacty the same per month: $0.00 per month. There are at least 2 possible reasons for your denial, and you maybe should get to the bottom of which one it is: 1. The audiologist made a mistake and your hearing loss was worse that the test showed. Not impossible. This is fixable with another audiologist (favorable opinion) where their test showed your hearing loss was actually worse than the exam showed. The audiologist equipment for testing is not always perfect, either. 2. The audiologist was correct, but the rating specialist made a mistake either through a computer error or by one or more errors hand calculating the hearing loss rating. (Its complicated!) This should be fixable upon an appeal with either a bva appeal, or possibly an HLR, as long as you dont need new evidence. Generally, I rarely recommend filing a supplemental claim when the Veteran is in the appeal period (tho there are exceptions) and suggest appealing instead to preserve the effective date. However, I will venture a "guess" that if your hearing loss was at a low level, your most likely percentage was 0 percent. Many Vets are rated at 0 percent, (hearing loss) even with some significant hearing loss. I wore hearing aids for a long time and was still rated at 0 percent (after I appealed the denial). I appealed that, too, and it got raised to 20 percent. All this said, I agree with Rattler because it may not make much difference whether you file a supplemental claim or appeal, if you are rated at 0 percent (likely, if you did not even meet the threshold before that). And, the supplemental claim may go faster. But, while there is a temptation to simplify the answer, I do think its better to let the Vet know of all his options before deciding, rather than filling in blanks for the Veteran that may or may not apply to him. There are, however, sometimes while even the effective date of a zero percent rating can make a difference elsewhere. For example, if you have other conditions, some of which may be secondary, such as depression or meniere's diesease, then the effective date of your hearing loss could limit those secondary effective dates.

Its not unusual to get negative c and p exams. I had a very negative exam. If you read very many board decisions, you will see that many say something to the effect "there is a balance of evidence for and against the claim". It's rare, when 100 percent of your evidence is positive. The good news, is, that, when there is a "balance of evidence for and against the claim" this is known as equipose, and the Veteran gets the benefit of the doubt, and the claim is awarded. In most court cases, there is evidence for both sides..its rarely all one way. And, if you do get denied, the solution is to get a favorable IMO..that you pay for. You see, people are loyal to the guy who signs their checks. Remember, VA pays for the c and p exams. It may cost you money for a independent medical opinion or independent medical exam, but its almost always worth it. Its one of the best investments you can make. I invested $500 in an IMO from a voc rehab specialist who provided a favorable IMO. This IMO "tipped the balance" in my favor and resulted in a six figure retro, plus ongoing awards, much more than $500. The idea that your seizures cant be "confirmed" because you did not have a seizure in the docs office while you were there 1 hour of your life when you are 50 years old, is preposteerous. Remember seizures only last a minute or two and by the time the doc arrives, its over, even if you had one 10 minutes before your c and p exam. Other people can confirm a seizure. Your spouse. EMT's. Nurses. Other family members who took you to the hospital. Other doctors. It sounds like seizures have already been documented, thats why you cant fly! You probably just need an IMO to review your records, and basically say, "Yes, there is evidence of a history of seizures in your records since dd mm yy". This is at least as likely as not due to an event in service. When you do hire an IMO, ask them to review your records and state that he did that in the IMO, and to give the date, also. (This could establish your effective date). I dont blame you for being skeptical of the Va, but, read the regulations on reductions, and you will see its very tough for the va to reduce vets who are p and t or over 5 years: https://www.law.cornell.edu/cfr/text/38/3.344 The VA would have to show you "actually improved" under ordinary conditions of life (aka while working), and that improvement was sustained, not just from a single exam, since many of us have good days and bad days. If you are not working outside the home earning an income, they are not gonna be able to give you a c and p exam and take away tdiu..altho sometimes they try, because some vets roll over and play dead and let va have their way. Dont do it, insist on your rights. VA tried to reduce me twice, I rebuffed both easily and quickly. The idiots tried to take away benefits for my spouse suggesting I was no longer married. Twice. I wrote a letter, and had my spouse write a letter that we were continiously married since 2006. The va had 0 evidence to refute my evidence, because it was the truth. About 3 weeks later, I got another letter, stating that my benefits would continue as man and wife. They just hope we are "asleep at the wheel" as many Vets are, and dont read the letters VA sends them. Its really unfair, because the people who are illiterate, or who can not understand the letters, get reduced. Of course, they use VA'ola lingo designed to confuse us, which often works for them. If you have difficulty understanding a letter from VA, white out your name and address and ssn, and post it here, and others will help.

The definition of tdiu is "unable to maintain substantial gainful employment(SGE)due to service connectected conditions". And, SGE is defined as the inability to earn "the poverty level" in a 12 month period. It does not mean you will lose your tdiu if you cut the neighbors grass or shovel their snow, as long you dont earn the poverty level (some where about 15k in a 12 month period). You can find the poverly level online (for va purposes). See my previous post, on the previous page, tho. It sounds to me like its for an increase to the CFS not to try to reduce your tdiu, as I explained.

"UNLESS" you started working and worked for a year, earning more than the poverty level, your p and t tdiu should not be reduced.

Whoa, Hoss! Before you get upset about a possible reduction to your TDIU, consider the real possibility of an INCREASE for CFS. Remember, you posted that CFS was "deferred", which means it will be rated "later". They may need a c and p exam for a possible increase and/or to rate your CFS. YOU COULD simply call your VSO, or, if/when an appointment is scheduled, ask them the nature of the disability. Its almost certainly for CFS, again, because its deferred and its a loose end. Its important because: "If", in the end result you wind up with a single 100 percent (tdiu counts) plus a combined 60 percent, (seperate and distinct) you should be awarded SMC S, Statuatory, which is good for about another $450 per month or so for you. Of course, IDK if that would be the result or not, but it is certainly possible. It would depend on your other ratings, your new cfs rating, and whether or not they combined to the 100 plus 60, and whether or not your disabilities were seperate and distinct.

Close, but no cigar, "relatively happy camper". It used to be that a Veteran could file an "informal claim FOR INCREASE" in his/her doctor's office "provided that" the doctor documents the Veteran is seeking BENEFITS for the condition, not just treatment. Informal claims for increase are no longer permitted, and a claim form must be filed for each new claim issue desired. However, if you have docutmentation of an informal claim for increase prior to Feb. 2019, you "may" be able to allege an earlier effective date in some instances. Remember, your effective date is the later of the date of claim or the facts found (the date the doc said you were disabled), so the documentation of the informal claim for increase may or may not result in an eed, but its worth a shot. NOTE: The term FOR INCREASE is important. The idea is the Veteran already submitted his formal claim form, and it was unnecessary to submit all that over again, so he could informally file claims, that essentially referenced his already filed formal claim. But, you had to first file the formal claim, thus, it has to be a claim for increase, that is, you have already filed a formal claim. Incidently, it worked for me, and I fought and won an eed based on an informal claim for increase. I had it documented in my file that "I was out of work and unable to find a job", in a letter to my vso that went with my application, and they determined that the va should have considered me for tdiu from the get go, because of that statment. Naturally, of course, the VA shredded my letter, BUT, low and behold, they shredded too many other Vets evidence and got caught doing it. And, it resulted in the famous shreddergate scandal of 2008, which allowed me to resubmit this evidence, per order's from Dr. Peake, the VASEC, at that time.

Agreed. Its tough enough to get it when you own the property. Frankly, I own my home and if I thought I could pull it off, I would seek a walk in tub/shower from VA, but have not persued it that much, because, if I know VA, they would delay it just long enough to they were sure I would either go into a nursing home and not need it or die. Its the VA way. The late Jim Strickland used to say, the VA delayed our benefits until we die.

...I moved this from another poster's thread...I should have done this earlier. Hopefully more will see this now.

I messed up. The OP asked about SMC L1/2 plus K. Then, I permitted the thread to go into SmC T, A DIFFERENT TOPIC. Its my fault, I did not notice it until now. To keep the confusion down, Im gonna move this to a new topic, so you may be able to get better answer's Lemeul, and, likewise, so other's may chime in on the original topic of L1/2 plus K. My fault. I should have caught this earlier.

Congratulations. Its my opinion that your odds are very good, just because you have been accepted by cck law as I will explain. I dont know anyone who has gotten SMC T. (BUT DONT GO BY MY LIMITED INFORMATION!) I heard through the grapevine "T" is not awarded anymore. Did cck law suggest you could get T? If so, I stand corrected. They are obviously more up on the regulation changes than I am. However, I do know your odds are great for some retro, because CCK law is not in the business of working for free, and they dont get paid until you get paid. And, they know way, way, way more about SMC than I ever will. In the past, its been my experince, that they dont recommend "applying for a rating of 80 percent" for example, but instead, suggest Vets apply for the maximum. That, would also apply to SMC, so my guess would be cck law would be seeking the max allowed by law. Therefore, I doubt that cck would make a business decision to represent you unless they felt there was a good chance, aka 70% or better, of getting you retro. Since I have never seen your c and p exam, and they have reviewed your file, they are also in a way better position to guess the level you may be looking for. R2, I think, is the highest level, and Im not sure if you would qualify for that, or not. It may be more realistic to look for SMC R1 but I have no idea, its just a completely unsubstantiated guess. Again, tho, they must think you should be eligible for retro, or they would decline to represent you, as they have to pay employees and the bills also, to keep their doors open, which they have succeeded in doing for a long long time.