broncovet

If you can, find out about the "sponsor"..that is her DAd, the Veteran. This would make it easy: Let me try an example. Lets say Jen turned 26 in 2007. Further, lets say Jens Dad was awareded 100 percent in 2011 effective in year 2007. Then Jen should qualify because it is not Jens fault that it took the VA four years to process the application. If you know when Jens dad recieved the decision and what the decisions effective date is, then if the dates coincide with the example I gave it should work. I hope I explained that right.

I have an extra legally licensed copy of the 2010 Veterans Benefit Manual from Lexis Nexus on DVD. They cost $139. What happened is that I ordered one, and Lexis Nexis messed up my order and did not deliver it when promised. I called them, and they offered to FED EX another copy. Now I have two copies, and they made it clear I dont need to send the other one back. I want this to go where it will do the most good for Veterans. If you need a copy, please PM me and let me know what you will be using it for. It is the 2010 version, the newest available. If you are a Vets advocate and could use one of these, please let me know. I am planning on donating it, especially to someone who is willing to look up stuff on it and pass this information on to Veterans in need of help.

I agree with Pete. The politicians meet with civic leaders over $100 a plate meals to discuss how to end homelessness with the newest government program, and end with exchanging business cards, with a plug for their brother, who just happens to be seeking a contract to build housing for the low income people. The Veteran homelessness situation is not solvable as long as their is a million man claim backlog. You show me a homeless Veteran, and I will show you a victim of RO shredding, long delays, VA red tape, denials, generally "falling through the cracks", or the Veteran just plain to isolated to know that he is eligible for benefits.

Travel at my VA is a disaster. You wait in line for an hour so you can wait in line another hour to get $6.80 Not ONE line, but TWO lines. One to get a form, then you take the form to another line and wait again. Our pharmacy also works in the same, Veteran unfriendly, inefficient way. Our VA has been using the software for a couple weeks. My travel pay went down, because when they had asked me how many miles, I had figured it from the way I always go..the hiway. They want me to go through town and a bunch of traffic lights because its shorter in distance, but will take more time. I used to get $8.30. That is what this software is about..its about saving money. Its always about "paying Veterans less"

Sometimes things like these can ultimately work out in your favor, but for now it seems pretty bad. Do you have any idea why this happened, or was this some sort of a plea bargain to scrap some claims in favor of others?

Its gonna be tough, based on what you posted. Assuming you did not appeal the 1998 claim within a year, then you are going to have to either try CUE or N and M evidence, as you can not appeal it now. However, as you pointed out this is not chump change, you could run it by a lawyer and see if he thinks he can "CUE" it and get you some retro.

Its possible but highly unlikely. Wash. D C is normally where claims go that are being appealed to the Board of Veterans Appeals. While it is possible that your claim was approved by the "Board", if so, it will be sent to the Regional Office in your state for "implementation". It is possible he recieved a call from his Veterans Service Officer, such as DAV or VFW rep, that sometimes send Veterans advance notice that their claim has been approved a few days before you get the decision in the mail. Years ago they sent "large retros" over 250,000 (or 10 years) to VACO in Washington DC, but the Court of VEterans Claims said that was a no-no. I can not understand why St. Louis would send a claim to Washington DC to be "rated", other than sometimes claims from RO's are sometimes farmed out to other RO's when they are very far behind and trying to catch up. All in all, its possible but all you can do is to make sure his address is correct and wait for the decision, other than call the VSO again.

Old JOe 1. Filing for SSD does not constitute an informal claim at the VA for IU. The VA would not know that you filed for benefits with another agency. However, IF YOUR VA DOCTOR OR VSO DOCUMENTED that you had filed for Social Security benefits for unemployability FOR conditions of which you are SERVICE CONNECTED, that medical exam may be used as an informal claim for effective date. Your "reasonably raised" claim for IU does not have to be on a special form, it just needs to be documented. 2. Your request for an increase in rating could be a "reasonably raised" claim for IU. If your VA doctor or VSO documented, for example that you were seeking an increase in disability because you cant get a job, that could well establish the effective date of your informal claim for IU. 3. Your award of IU establishes your entitlement to IU, and you need only to establish that you informally filed a claim for IU earlier. Dont worry about when the formal IU claim was filed as your formal application for benefits will suffice for both. You see you had already filed a formal claim. One is all that is necessary. You dont need to file 6 formal claims for 6 different conditions, but you do have to "specify the benfefit sought". You cant expect the VA to guess you were seeking benefits. But, the VA is required to give you a "liberal interpretation" of your filings. You do not have to say, "I want to apply for Total Disability due to Individual Unemployability". You can probably say something like, "My PTSD caused me to lose my job and I cant get another one" or something similar, as long as its documented in your records. 4. Your appeal could establish an EED for IU with the caveat: YOU ARENT getting any benefits before you applied. The effective date will be the later of When you applied, or when the "facts found" determined you had IU. Bottom LINE: To be successfull at an EED, you need to go over your medical records, looking for when you told your VA doc or other documention stating you are unemployed and this has to AFTER you filed a formal claim for benefits. If you told the VA doc you were unemployed in 1948, but you never applied for benefits until 2002, you wont get benefits until 2002.

Ok. To explain: You are looking for a CUE error. If you ask the VA for money, and they give you free calendars instead (zero percent compensation), I am alleging that is CUE. Remember, your VCAA letter needs to state that you are asking for compensation (money), for this to work. It wont work if your VCAA letter says you are seeking "service connection" and they award "service connection".

Good. Was this email "out of the blue" or had you sent an IRIS asking about your claim? I hope this works out well for you. It did not for me. I received an IRIS that I could "expect an answer on my claim in 4-6 weeks", and it took more than a year for them to deny me instead.

Yes, I agree that the C and P exams are often deficient in that they do not give an effective date...so the VA assumes that means the date of the exam. It usually results in the Veteran getting an unfair effecitve date.

Old JOe Remember that the doctor statements are the evidence which is ultimately used to grant or deny benefits. The doc says the Veteran has this symptom and that symptom, then the rating specialist looks those symptoms up on the criteria chart, and assigns a rating (or denies). The VA is supposed to use the criteria. They are not supposed to rate you based on whether you belong to the tea party or the tail-gate party. Unemployability is somewhat different than medical "percentage level" criteria. You dont "increase" in unemployability from 20% unemployable up to 100%....you either meet the TDIU criteria at any given time or you dont. But...lets use depression as an example. Lets say you were zero percent depressed in 1995, in 2003 your symptoms were consistent with the 30 percent level, and in 2007, they were consistent with a 70% rating. If you look at the IU criteria, you would see, in this case, you dont meet the IU criteria until you are 70% disabled, which would mean that your effective date would be 2007. Keeping with this example, if you lost your job in 2004, and told your doc about it and he put it in your medical report, you could try for a 2004 effective date, arguing the "facts found" was that you were unemployed in 2004. However, the VA would probably counter that you did not meet the criteria until 2007, when you were rated at 70%, finally meeting the criteria for TDIU.

I think the "facts found" often means the VA uses the date of the C and P exam to establish the effective date, and that is always crazy. This implies that prior to the C and P exam you were fine, but you must have gotten very sick in the examiners office because after the exam, you are now disabled. This is virtually never the case. If you "got disabled" at the C and P exam, what did the examiner DO to you? The examiner is not supposed to "make you disabled", but instead reports that you ARE disabled. Imho, the C and P examiner, should opine when the disability was likely to have occurred, rather than make the assumption it occurred at the exam date. Again, IMHO, if the examiner omits the opinion as to "when the disability likely occurred", this is a "faulty exam" because it is unreasonable to expect that VEteran became disabled during the exam.

The internet expert on Hep C and VA benefits is here: http://hcvets.com/index.html You can ask him questions by signing in at the forum. Berta is the expert on 1151 claims and DIC, and she is very good, too. Getting SC for hep is very complicated, tho, in part, because it can be caused by many things, such as jetguns, blood transfusions, dirty equipment, sharing IV needles, etc.

Ok, Baker. If you go to the store to get eggs, and then they give you Walnuts instead, cant you go back to the store and get the eggs you paid for? Something went wrong at the store. You dont need to figure it out. Let the store figure out what went wrong. Hand them the receipt for eggs and show em the walnuts. I am not recommending lying, EVER. But if you did not get what you asked for (money) then their free calendars and bouncy balls with the Vets hotline number on it dont count, and the letter they gave you said nothing about compensation, they just talked about SERVice connection, then tell them that you appreciate the free calendars and medical checkups because you are service connected, but you still want a decision about the MONEY. Service connection and service connected compensation are not the same thing. If your VCAA letter says you asked for compensation while they give you free calendars, you can still ask for your money. I am suggesting the possibility the VEt asked for compensation. MONEY. So the VA gives the Vet free calendars, and a nice letter instead. Great. But you forgot, I asked for MONEY, so I need a decision from you on money. I think they must have been out of calendars and "hotline boucy balls" but I am not all that concerned about them any way. I did not ask for walnuts, I asked for eggs. Tho these walnuts are fine, good quality, etc, I was unable to make an omlet with them. It was still a CUE error, because even those those walnuts are the best I ever ate, I was buying eggs for an omlet.

I would add this: VA employees should understand there is a push on for electronic claim processing, similar to the way lenders often approve loans for things like cars or computers. Most of the time, these things are awarded by the computer. If your credit score meets their minimum, and the income is good with sufficint time on the job, its done. They only work the marginal cases by "hand" and even then the employees will rarely deviate from the software's criteria. This would probably eliminate dozens and dozens of RO's and their jobs will be gone. Just a few national RO's with computers with pre programed software that zip, done. Everyone has the exact same criteria. Cleveland wont be stingier than Maine or New mexico with its Vets. Vets from Cleveland will love the fairness while Maine and New Mexico Vets will complain that their brother got benefits last year, before the automated processing, and his is denied. Thousands of VA employees complaining about their work load now, will be filling out resumes instead, as a $500 computer replaced them. This consolidation has been happening for decades and it is almost inevitable that it will also happen at the VA, whether we like it or not. No, I dont like it that when I call about my new video card, the customer service rep is from China or India, and I cant understand them. But I got my video card for $14, and did not want to buy the one for $249 that had local service. So, soon the guy at the computer store who made $35 per hour explianing my new 14 dollar video card had his job outsourced to China where they pay em $2 per hour. VA employees are best to not complain about the work load, but instead work diligently and giving more effort than required. When the conversion happens, they will keep only the very best and most well connected employees to stay. The others will be given pink slips.

Years ago, I learned a hard lesson on waxing floors. I gobbed on the wax, and spread it around. When it was done, it looked terrible. I asked about it, and they said, Did you read the directions? "No Time" "Well the directions state to remove all the old wax and dirt first, then apply the new wax in 3 coats" "Yes, but you did not hear me. I said I didnt have time for all that". He responded, "Well, if you dont have time to do it right the first time, when are you going to have time to do it over?" Of course the wax wont stick to old wax and dirt and oil. So, I had to do it over, and this time it took longer, because I had to remove the old wax and the new wax, then 3 coats of new. I doubt the VA is going to "save time" by doing a poor job of rushing medical exams. Instead, they are going to create job security because those appeals will still be going in ten years....well after "new claims" are processed by computer software, and only appeals have to have people to work them.

Baker's point is a good thing. You do want to be generous and graceful. You could also go to your boss and say, you know, boss, this is a tough economy, and I know you are struggling too. Instead of paying me the usual 20 per hour, I think you should reduce that to 10 per hour as my wife and I figured out we could survive on less. You can also do that with the VA. Not me. For examample, If I had a job, I would ask the boss to raise my 20 per hour because I am doing a great job saving the company money, and I have not gotten a raise since 2006. While both of the above may be true...that I could live on 10 per hour, but I would also like a raise, I am not going to mention to my boss that my wife thinks we could live on 10 per hour, because she may have forgotten about some expenses..and so might have I. Instead, I am going to tell my boss the reasons which support my position, and if he thinks I can survive on 10 per hour, that is not information he will get from me. If my boss confronted me and said, "I heard you can live on 10 per hour"...I would not lie, but I would not lay out my "poker hand" either. Instead, I would say something like, "Really? Where would you get an idea like that?" If he said he heard my wife say it, then I would say, "Gee, I need to have a talk with her...she still beleives Cinderalla will be delivered by the fairy godmother on a coach that looks like a pumpkin Tho I do love her optimism, it is I who has to pay the bills, and I can tell you for sure that if you give me the raise, we are much more likely to be able to live comfortably next year than if you reduce it to 10 per hour. " Instead, I say get every benefit legally due to you, then be generous with the money to the homeless and needy, and your church. Years ago Gomer Pyle "gave back" something like $10 of his paycheck, because he thought he had an easy week and did not earn it. It was hilarious, and you have to love Gomer. The military was shocked and it went up to the pentagon, if I recall. No one had ever heard of someone refusing part of their pay. I think it turned into a fiasco, and Gomer probably cost the government way more than 10 dollars with all those generals scratching their head at the Pentagon trying to figure out what to do. I dont rememeber what happened.

Man, I hate to be the bearer of bad news, but a disagreement in the way something was rated is not Cue, and I agree with Carlie on that. Even tho you did have quite a few colds, whether these are colds that everyone gets or whether they are related to sinisutis are a debatable issue, and Cue has to be undebatable. I would not however, throw in the towel just yet until the CAVC judge sings. Rather than do that I would try this: Look up your VCAA letter and see if it mentions you are seeking disability COMPENSATION. If you VCAA letter says you are seeking service connection ONLY, that is different..you got your service connection. Key word compensation. If you apply for COMPENSATion and they and they award NON compensation, it is reasonable that you are still expecting a compensation award, since you did not get it. It is entirely plausable that some VA benefits involve compensation while others do not. This may make your claim Pending, and you can appeal the effective date for compensation, not for service connection. The VA has benefits that are non compensatory so if you ask for money and they say, well we have a pile of NON money here to give you. Now you can say, ok, good...but where is my decision for compensation? Bottom LIne: NAIL them on what they say. They can not dispute ONE word they say, but they can dispute every thing you say. So, you can ask, well now that you ruled on non-compensatory benefits, where is the decision on compensation, since these are not the same thing. One is money the other is not. I have no idea if this will work or not...but I am working on something similar. I applied for service connected compensation benefits, which were denied. I appealed to the BVA which awarded as such. The RO says I deserve 0 percent. I say..read my application over again, your VCAA letter says I am seeking compensation, not empty lolipop sticks. So when I appealed, I was appealing compensation not service connection. Remember...this is what YOUR letter (the VCAA letter) says...so you owe me money not service connection.

Cherie...This may help you. First, remember that calls to the 800 number, as well as IRIS emails are very often inaccurate. Here is what I would do: At my VAMC they have someone there who works for the RO, but is stationed at the VAMC. I went to him and he looked me up and wrote about 3 letters for me: One to get commissary priveleges, one for state hunting and fishing licenses, and one for license plates. He signed them and handed them to me. He seemed to understand that the people at the tax assessors office have no idea what TDIU or "no future exams scheduled" means. If there is no such person at your VAMC, then you can send a 21-4138 to your RO and direct the letter to "eligibility office"..at least that is what they call it at my RO. Tell them you are a recent 100 percent Vet and need eligibility letters for these things. This is what worked for me.

You are not the first person to be dissatisfied with their VSO "rep", and I doubt you will be the last. Some advocate doing your claim yourself and not use the rep. I would exercise caution in waiting too long to file NOD. YOu get busy, you forget, and whosh..the year goes by. At a minimum, type up the letter, know exactly what it is to say, and have it ready to mail. My experience is the 5P's usually works: Proper Preperation Prevents Poor Perfomance. You can use this time to research CAVC or BVA case law pertaining to it, you can also study your own medical records. There is some truth to what your rep said about fighting the docs opinion, but there are at least 3 ways to fight an "adverse" C and P medical exam: 1. Ask for another doctor, at the VA, and you can ask him if he thinks there is a definate link between these conditions. That is, ask him if he will provide a "nexus". If he will not, then you can still do items 2 or 3. 2. Get an Indempendent Medical Opinion. 3 Get an Independent Medical Exam. Your rep is right that an "unrebutted" adverse medical exam is likely going to lead to a denial. But there are other doctors, both in and out of the VA. (Sometimes docs dont want to go against their peers) ONLY a qualified medical professional can rebut an adverse medical opinion. Even a judge can not substitue his own opinion for that of a doctor who examined you.

I understand your frustration, and am in the same "boat". I recommend you file a Notice of Disagreement, something like this: Notice of Disagreement I disagree with the Regional Office Decision dated May 4, 2010 and plan to contest the result with a DRO review as to the following issues: 1. I disagree with the effective date of the claim as I actually applied for benefits on 11/30/04, contrary to the RO decision. A copy of my application on this date is enclosed. (Clearly state your reasons why you feel the earlier effecitve date is justified...you had an informal claim at the docs office, your paperwork got lost, the claim was overlooked, etc.) The NOD should always a) be in writing b) express dissatisfaction with the decision and indicate a desire to appeal c) identify the RO decision by date d) identify the issue(s) you are disputing e) be signed by the Veteran f) be mailed to the RO (or hand delivered) and I suggest it be sent Certified Mail, Return Receipt requested with the Veteran keeping a copy. Many people say "This is your chance to tell your side of the story" and use the NOD to present your case and cite evidence as to why you think the decision was wrong. Some Veterans take a great amount of time, thoroughly research the case law, CFR's, Fast letters, etc and their own evidence to their NOD. I have found that the 5 P's seems to work while other things dont work as well: Proper Preperation Prevents Poor Performance While it is still possible to submit your "arguments" at other times, by putting it with the NOD, you can be assured that you at least got the chance to be heard.

This will likely result is a "pink slip" for Bachman. It is well known the AARP will fierecely attack any politician who messes with their social security benefits. I only wish that Veterans lobbyists were as well funded and well organized as the powerfull AARP. You see Seniors are united in making the politicians keep their grubby paws off their social security check. But the Veteran community is divided between Iraq Vets, Gulf War, VN, WW2, combat Vets, non combat Vets, etc. I do think there are enough seniors, who are also Veterans, to beat this plan.

I could surely understand why you would not want to submit evidence that was not probative, like Carlie said, but sometimes the Vet would not always Know if what he was submitting was probative or not...this would be for the judge to decide. I was communicating with a Vet recently about the BVA case, and we agreed that it was best to "shotgun" it, because if we omitted an issue, we cant raise that issue the first time at the CAVC. So, even if our "arguement" or "legal theory" as to why we think we should get our benefits is shot down by the BVA, we have a chance at appealing that legal theory to the CAVC. It may be possible that the Veteran thinks he should get benifits for a half dozen legal theories. Oh, I dont know, maybe the Veteran was seeking an earlier date and had several legal theories such as: 1. medical exam was an informal claim for benefits establishing and EED. 2. RO failed to sympathetically intepret the Veterans filings and develop the claim to its optimum. 3. Under the constructive notice of Bell, the Veteran contends that the VARO should have had this evidence, but did not give a reasons and bases for not considering it in the decision. 4. The Ro failed to implement a previous BVA decision. 5. The RO decisions were contradictory, or inconsistent. 6. The RO mishandled evidence.

My BVA certification notice specifies 90 days to submit additional evidence. I cant say all of them say that, because I dont know, but mine says it. If I recall, Katrina Eagle said not to submit additional evidence at this point, so I admit to being confused, because she should certainly know what she is talking about and I respect her opinion. I really dont know why this discrpency. Of course, there is the possibility things changed since she wrote that article, which I have posted on hadit before.