broncovet

John... You got that right! The VA is a black box with a string in it and you dont know when or if the string will come out. You have to remember the VA is a very large organazation with many people with widely different view points about Veterans and other issues. People always want to know "what the VA will do"...this is kinda like trying to predict which frog will jump the highest in a frog jumping contest. For each claim there is one decision maker who has the srtiped shirts and "calls the play". Yes, some of the calls are not just controversial..they are just plain wrong. But the one with the striped shirts is always with the VA. And, as the VA calls it, "the VA is an interested party" in your decision. The results are mixed. Many, many Vets who deserve benefits are denied..but then are faced with a choice of whether or not they want to fight the VA for five years or try something else. There are also a few who may get some benefits they dont deserve...and I dont begrudge those Vets one bit. After all..who should the money go to? VA executive bonuses.? Government Contractors.? More concrete memorials to Vets?

WAC I agree..and I think I even mentioned that on "the other board". You were thorough..gee I wish I could use you to write up my EED appeal. The only comment I have is your use of the word "clearly". Attornies use that almost as much as they use the word "claimant" or "petitioner". I will have to say that even tho I agree with your interpretation...of course, it does not matter what I think..or what Vike and Cruiser thinks. It only matters what the judge thinks...and I have found they dont always think "clearly". As CC says, "Never Give UP". You have applied the 5 P's...Proper Preperation Prevents Poor Performance. You looked up case law and did your homework. I think you will win.

Wac I do agree with your interpretation that disabilities (above 100%) are added, not combined...for a mathematical reason as well as the legal interpretation you cited. The "whole man" concept of combining ratings uses 100% as what I shall call the "base max". %. However, that being said, I have no doubt this is the way it will go down. Cruiser and Vike are ex VA employees who defend the VA on everything. They are both very helpfull if you want to ask how the VARO will rate it...because they will do it like they say. However, just because Vike and Cruiser or any other rater, DRO officer etc..does it that way, does not mean that will stand in the courts. The VARO has shown their colors..they are fully planning to deny anyone who does not COMBINE to 100 plus 60. However, I dont think it will stand..the CAVC will overturn it..or possibly the federal court. Time and time again...the RO way does not hold up in court...and we need to "get this"...The RO intends it that way. There simply is not enough money to go around, so they pay the Vets claims who are the most persistent in taking it through the courts. Professor Linda Bilmes pointed out that most VA claims are paid by the VA eventually anyway..that is, provided the Veteran go through the long appeal process. I think the Supreme court, in Henderson, pointed out that the VA awards at least some benefits (award or remand) to the Veteran at the CAVC level, and only denies about 21%. Remember, in that 21 percent of Vets who get denied, a significant portion of those are denied because of untimely appeal. When you dont appeal timely, you are basically abandoning your claim..or at least prior to Henderson. Bottom Line: If you are persistent and diligent in your appeal, you will win. If you give up, you lose.

I agree with Pete. The article says Richardsons move was "lateral" neither a promotion or a reduction. When it is time to "take out the trash" you dont throw it in your neighbors lawn if you expect to have good neighbors.

Yea, it sounds real macho to make troops carry 100 pound packs for miles. However, instead of making troops tougher, they are actually causing them injuries...sometimes permanent injuries. My son, who recently got back from Iraq, told me the same thing...that several of his buddies were injured because they made them carry too heavy of packs for too far. Sometimes I wish the military would "grow up"...I am sure you notice they have very few wise old men in the military..most of us "smart ones" got out and are Vets now...after we got a lot older and wiser. Of course, tho, the dumbest ones are the ones who THINK they are smart. I dont think I am so smart anymore.

Or try this link: http://jimstrickland...Reductions.html Yes, I agree with Sharon, but it sounds like your son may have to prove it. Hopefully, if the VA reduction is unfounded, the VA will drop it. Be sure to respond to their "sixty day" letter proposal to reduce. Katrina recommends asking for a hearing, if I recall. This gives you more time..and delays in reductions are good!

I think the link still works to Eagles article on reductions. Try here checking "broncovet" posts. You are unlikely to get better advice on Veterans benefits that Katrina Eagle...I think she is or was the president of NVLSP or NOVA...one of those Veterans attorney organizations, I cant remember which.

There are very specific things the VA has to do on reductions. How long has your son been SC for this? That is what is his effective date? There are rules which protect Veterans ratings at 5years and 20 years. If no one else chimes in, I will try to look up Katrina Eagles excellent article on VA reductions. (She is a well known lawyer representing Veterans). She has some great advice. I think it will help you. While Katrina Eagles advice has been removed from the internet when she changed law firms, I think I posted it here on hadit.

By taking the "Wait and See" method, I outlined above, I think you are giving yourself the BEST chance to win. Remember, the VA is going to pick who examines you for a C and P exam...the Veteran does not choose which VA or QTC doc does the C and P exam. Remember also, that the Doctors report is critical evidence...so critical I say your case is won or lost in the docs office. If the doc provides the right nexus, you should eventually be awarded benefits. I have not read ONE denial that said, "The VA C and P examiner opined that his condition was at least as likely as not related to military service" BUT...the claim gets denied anyway. Mine was actually denied, but then overturned on appeal, which happens also. However, if the VA doc does NOT put "the right stuff" in your records, such as opining, "The Veterans knee problems are not related to military service"....then, you have to have evidence to overcome the docs negative C and P exam. It is not enough for you or I or Superman to say, "That VA doc was wrong...I think it was related to military". Instead, this rebuttal needs to come from another doctor(s) or medical professional qualified to say what caused your knee problems.

Ok...so we have an opinion that you should send it in. Then we have an opinion to keep VA and OWCP seperate, that is dont send them in. Crazily, I recommend a still different option. Wait and See. Here is why. Ok, so you apply for Va benefits on your knees..lets say the VA C and P does an exam.. this exam is going to be critical. Lets consider two possibilities: 1. VA c and P exam doc says your condition is "at least as likely as not" related to military service and he states your knees conditions is worse than what your Work comp doc said. That is "favorable VA c and P exam. In this circumstance, dont send in the OWCP exam...as this evidence will "hurt" your case. You already have good evidence so dont send in bad. 2. VA C and P exam doc says..I dont think your knees are that bad..I think you can work..they arent related to military, etc. (Un favorable exam). Now, you need evidence to "rebut" this unfavorable exam. Enter OWCP exam that is more favorable...(you may still need other IMOs/ IME's also, BUT if you have TWO docs that says your VA doc was nuts, then you have "rebutted" unfavorable evidence.)

It is up to you when to file a claim for benefits. However, the earlier you file, the earlier your effective date. I am not going to tell you that you should go against your VSO...I am sure he knows way more about your case than I do. That being said, I can not find ONE PERSON who has ever said..."Gee, I wished I would have filed that VA claim Later" But, I can tell you I am in the group who says, instead, "Why was I so stupid when I could have filed my claim much earlier?" Retro checks are like garages...they can never be too big. Most people only ever get ONE retro check (a few get more than one, especially if you were lowballed, then later got 100% or TDIU, but you usually only get one BIG retro check)

Yes, you can file a NOD while starting a new claim. The earlier you file, the earlier your effective date and the more the retro. If you think you have a compensable SC condition, I would not delay. Of course, you also need to file your NOD within the one year after the decision, but the day you file the NOD has nothing to do with your effecitve date.

If it has been a year or more since you applied, then you should consider filing a Writ of Mandamus. I did. It did get my claim "moving" again, and kept me from going crazy. I think a Writ is more effective than contacting your congress critters in getting it moving. If you are going to file a writ, PR, it is recommended you send a "Notice of Intent to File a Writ" about one to 2 months ahead of time. A writ is the remedy when nothing else works. It is not for a "regular" appeal.

I have seen similar issues argued on another board. The retired rater said it would depend on what issues you were "IU" for. To qualify for Bradley vs Peak, your conditions have to be "independent" of each other. In other words were you "IU" for depression, IU for Cystocele, or both. However, I have found that appeals takes an entirely different view than rating speciailists. Rating specialists goal is to "get that claim out" as fast as possible, so denials work well that way. My guess is that you may eventually win, but it will take at least one level of appeals.

I agree with the others. About 9 months is not long for the VA...they like to delay much longer. Maybe in a couple years you can consider filing a writ of mandamus....I dont expect that to do much good now. The Va will aways hide behind the "million man backlog" Compared to basser, I am a "short timer" only having waited 9 years on my claim.

Yes, Go Sue Go! I know a Veteran who has been waiting since 1973 for his benefits, so its not suprising, and this is not the longest a VEt has ever waited, either. It should be a crime to treat Vets this way. IMHO delays are worse than denials...denials can be appealed, but the VA just keeps on delaying until we die.

The answer depends on wherein lies your priorities. If money is important to you, then preserve your effective date by filing ASAP. However, if you would rather get in good with VSO's and rating specialists, then collect your "atta boys" and file later. Here is the reality: NO MATTER WHAT YOU DO, the VA is going to "Delay" you. YOu would have better luck stopping a Japanese Tsunami than trying to stop a "VA delay". Waiting to file your claims is not going to stop VA delays, and it isnt going to stop Tsunami's either. There is a million man backlog and delays are as inevitable as taxes.

About 2 years ago, I thought I was having a heart attack. Wife called VAMC. They said they were "diverting patients" because they were full. They authorized "fee basis" care, right then and there. I did not have a problem getting them to pay. Therefore: I recommend: Get an authorization from your VAMC BEFORE you do fee basis...even in an emergency, your wife can give them a call WHILE SHE IS DRIVING YOU TO THE HOSPITAL. THEN GET THE NAME AND PHONE NUMBER OF THE PERSON AUTHORIZING IT. (BECAUSE YOU KNOW THE va IS GOING TO TRY TO WEASEL OUT OF IT..THEY ALWAYS DO)

This is more anti republican political spin and is "highly political" and should be removed or, as a minimum, the truth be told: Fact: The last time Vets got a Cola was when a Republican was president. Fact: Government employees, and especially executives got big raises in the past two years while Vets got zero: http://www.theblaze....n-obamas-watch/ The democrats arguement that "Its not the leaders fault for NO Cola...its the CPI's fault" fails miserably, on many levels: 1. It "fixes the blame" not fixing any problems..if it is the CPI's fault, then the leaders need to fix it with better laws. 2. It tries to blame Obama's predecessor. He has had plenty of time to reform health care, so he has had enough time to fix this injustice if he wanted to. Sooner or later, someone needs to stop passing the buck, blaming others for leadership failure. 3. How can inflation be zero for $750 per month disabled Vets, while there seems to be plenty of inflation for government executives earning over $150k per year. It cant be both ways. Its false. I think whenever this "anti republican spin" is allowed to be posted, I should be allowed to refute it. Vets are only hearing "one side".

I have a suggestion, meant to help: Shorten it up. Reason: The VA loves to use OUR words against us. Fewer words means less of a chance to say something that will hurt us. Remember the VA wont rate us on our medical opinions anyway so I would refer them to medical exams made by medical professionals. Its okay to state your symptoms...especially the ones for which the RO had failed to adjuticate but I would state them like this: On June 21, 2010 Dr. Smith, in a VA exam reported the Veteran had...(list symptoms in the report). Make sure you have all three things necessary for an informal/inferred claim: According to the VBM there is a 3 prong test for an inferred claim. Get all 3. 1. It has to be written. (VA docs exam is fine) 2) It has to demonstrate the Veteran intended to apply for a benefit and 3) You have to "specify the benefit sought". This assumes, of course, YOU HAVE ALREADY FILED A FORMAL CLAIM FOR BENEFITS. (But you only have to file ONE formal claim)...the rest can be informal or inferred. If you are missing "one of the legs of the claim stool" it will fall over. There are some exceptions, like if you are 100 percent disabled eligibility for SMC is inferred, and you do not need to show intent to apply for "SMC S" housebound..its automaticly inferred, and you dont need to show intent. when you are 100 percent, for example.

This is a good question. Remember the VA rating schedules are based primarily on symptoms not diagnosis. Most of the time, for example, if X condition is "asymptomatic", you will get, at most, 0% for it. I think some Vets think they get rated for "condtions" but it always boils down to what are the symptoms. One poster wanted to know the max rating for "feet" problems. I told him that if his feet were so bad as to be unusable requiring a wheel chair to move, he would likely get 100 percent if service connected. But if his "feet hurt" only after a day of working, shoppping, and fishing, then he would be lucky to get 0%. Its about the symptoms, where both of these people may have had "feet that hurt". If you have symptoms of hearing loss, tinnitus, your back is in pain from a gunshot wound, and your liver is diseased from hep C causing you pain, you should apply for all these symptoms. I would let the VA worry about whether this symptom was from "Gulf War Ilness", undiagnosed illness, or secondary to your GSW. The VA, unless you are a medical professional, does not believe you are competent to diagnose your own conditions anyway, and will want confirmation from a medical professional. If you tell them you have hearing loss, they will want to hear from an audiologist how bad your hearing loss is, and whether the audioligist thinks your hearing loss is service connected or not. It is not necessarily bad that you propose diagnosis for your conditions, but, sometimes, if you are wrong it can result in delays. For example if you think you have "depression" but the doc diagnosis you instead with "Bipolar disorder", it will be difficult to fix this and could result in lost money for you on the effective dates. Dot all your I's and cross all your T's by looking at your medical records and see how the doc diagnosed you.

Ruski I went through that also....I was kinda desperate for help, and complained and irritated volunteers and got in deep do-do with even some of the moderators. However, I think I learned "where my bread is buttered" understanding well that these people dont have to help me...they help me only if I succeed in making them want to. I have been able to "give back" to some other Vets, gaining knowledge and sharing it on some issues that I am most familiar with. For example, I was able to help a Vet just this morning...explaining that VA audiology may provide him with a special phone to help the hearing impaired. Some people do not know they can get a free phone if they are SC for hearing loss and need one..if they ask for it. So, I hear ya..but of course the mods are right, and you aint gonna get much help ticking off the volunteers who are volunteering their time to try to help you. Some of the Vets on here have serious issues..some have severe PTSD or other mental health issues..some are very sick..and even some have passed on after posting. So many of us are sympathetic to a Veteran wanting to vent about bad service they got at the VA, as so many of us have. Just dont attack the volunteers. Most of us are as frustrated with the VA as you are, if not more so.

It depends on your priorities. If you need money, then by all means file ASAP as it will effect your effective date. However, if you dont need money, and it is more important for you to make your VSO's or rating specialists job easier, then you may consider going "one at a time". Personally, I am not buying into the VSO's or rating specialists suggestion that I file claims "one at a time" to make their job easier if that costs me money on the effective date. I dont care if they label me a "Professional claim filer". They are getting a good paycheck to serve Veterans, and when it is my turn, I deserve good service as I did a good job in the military, being awarded the "good conduct" medal.

I recommend you go to your audio department at the VA and explain the problem to them..they might have a phone with a volume control for you (but you may have to wait on that one also). I did get a home phone from the VA Audio dept. that is awesome. It has a volume control, works with my hearing aids, and "lights up" when it rings. Most importantly, it has incredibly clear crisp sound to it (great audio quality), which helps me tremendously understand the speaker. These are not cheap Wal mart variety phones with a volume switch added but a very high quality expensive phone designed for use by individuals who are hard of hearing. And they are free at your VA to hearing loss SC Vets if you ask for it and your audiologist thinks it will help you. The brand name of my high quality VA supplied phone is "Clarity", and it is awesome. There are other devices they have that may also help you. Ask them. The "hearing" community has no idea what it is like to be hard of hearing, erroneously beleiving that hearing aids will magically solve all our issues...yea right.. like what are you going to do for the next 4 weeks working in a call center waiting for your hearing aids to be repaired. This is a severe problem...often another one hearing aid users have is batteries. What if your hearing aid batteries fail at an in opportune time, such as when you are on a job interview. I am sure your interviewer wants to wait while you replace those batteries..even if you were alert enough to make sure they are on your person. With my hearing aids, I cant put them in right out of the shower. I have to carefully dry my ears, then still wait for moisture to go away for an hour or so as the humidity tends to "fog up" my aids rendering them unusable. Even when I have my aids in, and the batteries are working...it is still not like being able to hear. My aids are supposed to be compatable with the telephones, but most of the time they start ringing and I have to take them out when the phone rings....then remember not lose the devices, which my VA wont replace until the aids are about 4 years old.

IMHO I have good news and bad news: First, the bad news: Its gonna take forever to get this straightened out, and you have no choice but to wait. Rookie Raters are going to have no clue what to do with this, and it will be handed down until it eventaully arrives at a senior rating VSR's desk, and even then it is likely to get (passed on) denied and sent to the BVA. Now the good news: According to the VBM, the Veterans remedy when the RO fails to file the required SOC is to file a writ (and valid "writs" even tho they will be denied, are an embarrassment to the RO and it seems to motivate them to get off their duff and award benefits, IMHO) 2. When the RO refuses to issue a Statement of the Case after receiving a timely Notice of Disagreement When the RO refuses to issue a Statement of the Case after receiving a timely Notice of Disagreement from the claimant, the veteran should, after a written demand letter fails to persuade the RO to issue a SOC, petition the CAVC for a writ under the All Writs Act to compel the RO to issue the SOC so that the appellate process may be completed. The CAVC will entertain this petition because it involves a claim over which the CAVC could eventually have jurisdiction � because once the agency acts appropriately and complies with all procedural requirements, the veteran would be able to pursue the appellate process within the VA, culminating in a final BVA decision that would then be appealable to the CAVC.123