broncovet

Wings... I read your NOD earlier and thought it was brilliant, in fact, I thought I left a comment to that effect, but I dont see the comment I thought I left. I do hope you consider it an honor that other Vets want to use it as a template..most of us simply do not have your skill in writing. Even tho I do think it is sad that sometimes claims are decided by the skill of the person, it seems like that should not be the case. I am not blaming YOU..you found out the rules, and then skillfully played by the rules and you will likely win. What I am blaming is the system. Should disability claims not be decided on the basis of the disability, rather than the skill of the writer upon appeal? Frankly the more disabled a person is mentally, the less likely he would be able to compose an effective, concise and organized appeal. However, if I were the one reading the appeals, I am sure that I, too, would be more likely to approve a claim that was well written, like yours, rather than meaningless ramblings that I tend to do.

Carlie Not to be Nitpicky, but your last couple posts addresses "bronco" when I think you meant "bm6546", because I did not say any of those things. Thanks..no offense taken, I just wanted to set the record straight. ...Broncovet, aka, "Bronco"

Commander Bob and I agree that you should get another therapist. However, Cowgirl made a real good point that receiving medicine, including therapy, is not always pain free. Sometimes we have to endure the pain of talking about things we dont want to talk about in order to get better. It is almost never good to leave it inside of you and let it "eat" at you. Ignoring that it is raining will not make you dry.

IMHO you should always ask for a DRO because it is one more chance for your claim to get approved. The order is: VARO motion for reconsideration and DRO (optional) BVA CAVC Federal appeal court Supreme court I think I have that right, please correct me if someone knows better. On this list, you move from the top to the bottom until you quit or someone approves your claim. The only "negative" IMHO of having a DRO appeal is that it takes time. There are 2 types of DRO: A DRO HEARING A DRO REview DRO hearings take much longer. A DRO hearing officer will have a formal hearing and that can take a couple years. In a DRO review, you are not present. You just send a NOD and or staments as to why you disagree with the decision and why you think you should get a higher rating or service connection. Many Vets feel a DRO is just a carbon copy of the original decision, and, even tho I have had two "negative" DRO decisions, I still think it is a good idea to let as many people as possible decide your claim as that is one more chance to get it approved.

Purple I would encourage you to make diet changes to increase potassium. You need to eat more banannas, (and other fruits), potatoes (with skin), soy products (soy milk, soybeans) like this says: http://www.ehow.com/how_2069648_increase-p...sium-intake.htm I agree with you that the VA's credibility is very low. They tell us stuff and we find out later it was all a cover up.

Berta IMHO they would "phase in" fully automated claims, as follows: The Veteran would apply electronically..just like is already done with student loan applications, employment applications, college applications and lots and lots of other stuff. now..and has been done that way for years. The rating specialist would come to a Veterans claim. The computer would make a reccomendation: the rating specialist could read it over, and click "accept computer assesment" and poof, a letter would go out to the Veteran, decline or award benefits. Of course compliance with regulations would be built in to the software and not appealed 4 years later as it is now. However, if the rating specialist did not like the computers assessment, he could do one manually...but he may have to answer to his superiors exactly why he went "against" the computer assesment. Remember that some software is "intelligent" and learns. An example of that is spam software. It learns what you think is spam every time you put something in the spam box or click, "this is not spam". I simply do not buy VA's "six month claim processing" story. I think that fewer than 10% happen in six months or less. I think these numbers are manipulated by the VA, and even faked by some RO's. Of course software has glitches, but I think that the decisions would be more accurate than humans do now. Of course, writing software for this would be a big project, however, it would be worth it. Claims should be done in days, not years like they are now.

Simple Fly You said the VA "could not find a nexus between..." That means very little the VA "cant find" something! I think they couldnt find their way out of a wet paper bag over their head. The VA "couldnt find" 700 Veterans critical claim documents and then "found" them. Saying they "cant find" something does not mean the same as it does not exist. It could well mean that is was shredded, mishandled, lost, or simply buried in a stack of papers! I may humblley suggest you "help them find" this nexus. In your NOD (or in a statement in support of claim) tell them you "found" it for them, then enclose the document you think contains the nexus, and yellow highlight YOUR nexus and ask them to review you decision now that they found the nexus! Of course, you can also file a "special claims handling" request if you think that pertinent evidence was shredded or mishandled.

I really dont know that much about Duckworth, but I am all for giving her the chance. However, I am not sure about this, but was she one of the Spokespersons on Dr. Phil? I think I remember she was a disabled Vet..no legs..female..probably not too many of them. It seemed like she said she was from Illinois, but was more like the head of a state VSO and did not work for VA. Anyway, if that woman is the one, there is no doubt in my mind she is Pro-Vet and will do right by us. WE NEED many more "pro Vet" people in authority..the higher the authority the better. I really dont think the Secretary of Veterans affairs should be a "political" decision. I do feel pretty good about Shinseki-Duckworth being pro-vet, but I guess only time will tell.

tssnave Great point. The VA has dozens of lawyers on staff, being paid hundreds of thousands of dollars. I wonder how many of those lawyers waited...mmm say, 5 years or so to get paid. They are waiting..so when ever we appeal our claim, they want to "trap" us...gee, you applied for one condition and not the other one..gee, you sent your NOD one day too late...gee, we dont have proof your condition is service connected...too bad the VA lawyers dont have to "proove" they are Pro-Veteran in order to get paid. We already prooved our loyalty to this country..we risked life and limb..we should not have to prove it again. Why should a Veteran have to prove he is smart enought to weave throught the VA maze of regulations to get his benefits and persistent enough to wait for years and years? Are these claims based on writing skills of the Veteran? Organization skills? Ability to "pick" a good VSO? Comer and Roberson needs to be enforced: Comer vs Peake: "The VA is required to give a sympathetic reading to a veteran's filings even where the facts of a particular case do not "coincide" with the facts presented in Roberson" Roberson said it this way: ...."the Congressional mandate that the VA is to ‘fully and sympathetically develop the veteran’s claim to its optimum before decision on its merits.’ Time after time the VARO violates the above regulations and gets away with it, and the Veteran pays. If you file your NOD, be sure to include the above, if applicable.

Brian It sounds to me like you have done everything right, except I did not see where you filed NOD's to your denials. As thorough as you were, I am assuming you did not skip that critical step. The VA is not allowed to substitute an unsubstantiated rating specialists opinion for that of a qualified medical professional..altho they sure try to do that, but it is overturned upon appeal usually. The rating specialists like these words, and it is not illegal or immoral for you to ask the doctor to say them, in his report: "The Veterans heart attack was most likely due (or aggravated by) to the conditions suffered while in military service" You may go back to your doc, and if he is "pro Veteran" he may just put that in your chart for you. If he, or another doc will do that for you, it will be very hard for the VA to make any denial stick, once it gets to the BVA or CVAC. JMHO

Carlie Thanks for the response. As I said, I hope to see Mr. 35 in Group tommorrow, and I will ask him..I may even print these posts just to let him know we are pulling for him. He tells me they are Vietnam war wounds..of course I do not know, but, if you meet him, I think you would also be able to sense his sincerity. I have some spare computers/parts around and I am building Mr. 35 a computer..I already told him I would. Its almost complete, but he will need to order an internet service..I dont know if he has the money for that or not however, if I have ANYTHING to say about it, tho, he will get internet service and I am donating a computer. It is the least I can do..as a thank you for serving our country. I have the right, right now, to express my dissatisfaction with a US government agency in no small part to Veterans who have fought for my right to do so. Thanks for listening and responding. In a few weeks, if things go as I plan, Mr. 35 will get on hadit and answer these very good questions himself.

Berta Yes, it is difficult to accept 35 years without a resolution. Remember this, tho. You are educated and motivated. Mr. 35 does not own a computer, does not get around easily, and is African American. The VA van, manned by volunteers, drives him around..when they have time. I doubt they even had this van thirty five years ago. He does not have access to hadit, va.gov etc. I think there are OTHER VETS who probably applied years ago, got denied, and are homeless or dead, some from suicide. They just did not make it through the VA maze. Nobody published their story on "success stories". Their death may have not even made the papers, and when it did, there was no mention that they were a Veteran and had applied for benefits back in 1950, were denied and did not know how to appeal it. So, they turned to the street, and became alcoholics, drug addicted, homeless and took their own life. It might have been the man in a Wisconsin nursing home who froze to death. We know he was a Veteran but little else. I really think Mr. 35 is an example of, but not the worst injustice to Veterans. Maybe I can take a picture of him..maybe even post it on YOU TUBE or something. I think a picture would be worth a thousand words.

Well, Stretch..I did not think Mr. 35's claim was the oldest. Can any one beat 59 years to approve a Vets claim? I will probably see Mr. Russel ("Mr. 35 ") in Group again tommorrow. I had his phone number from last week but cant seem to find it right now. He did mention he was going south for a few weeks, but I dont know when, so he may not be in group. Of course, I do not know all of his details, as I said, I am sure it is some type of lowball with NSC pension, as Berta suggested. It really only takes one look at the man to tell he is 100%..the braces on his legs and motorized wheel chair are a dead give away. Mr. 35 is in touch with his congressman, and tells me the VA has to give a report to the congressman EVERY 60 days as to the status of his case. I can almost see the report now: "Thank you for the inquiry as to Mr. 35's claim processing delay. I can assure you we are diligently working on it, and expect to have an anwer within the next 35 years, baring no unforseen circumstances. Thank you for your patience. In other events, we would like to congratulate Ms Christine Alford, former VARO Cleveland manager on her promotion to the Central Office. Ms Alford was given this promotion due to excellent Veterans Service to Veterans like Mr. 35" Maybe we should get Stetch's father in law (Mr. 59), Mr. 35, and my "measley" 8 year claim delay together..together we have 102 years of disgrace to Vetrans. Oh, and YES, I am going to help Mr. 35..believe me, I am going to help him. My blood boils when I see this disgrace to Veterans. Isnt it disgusting that 35 years is not even close to the worst? I am hoping Dr. Phil, or the media gets hold of this..mainly because his disabilities are so obvious.

Skunk I dont want to be the bearer of bad news, but I asked for this back in 2004 as I was loosing my home. It will depend on your regional office. If you are in Cleveland, you better figure something else out, because those people wont help you. Some of the other RO's are not as bad. How do you think that Cleveland got the reputation of being the stingiest RO in the nation, according to the AG report? Oh, yes..and I did loose my home. VA did not care. I finally got partial benefits about a year later.

In my group therapy, there is a man there who is in a wheel chair (motorized scooter) with braces on each leg. He tells me that he was wounded in Vietnam, and applied for VA benefits with the Cleveland Regional Office in 1973. He further says that he has been awarded NSC Pension, however, even tho the VA wrote a letter saying he was disabled (SC) in 1973, there has been some sort of error and he is not Service connected. He has been trying to get this resolved, for years..even going through congressmen..Veterans Service Officers..everything..and has been unable to get his issue resolved. His claim is MORE THAN 35 years old. Does anyone out there have a claim older than 35 years? I think Guiness should hear about this one, and send the VARO in Cleveland a "letter of shame" for disrespect to this and all Veterans. I have met this man and am convinced he is "for real"..he seems to welcome the media, etc. to look into this. He just wants what is his. Has anyone out there waited LONGER than 35 years for benefits? If so, please respond..I think the Cleveland Regional Office deserves a "letter of shame" for this.

Alan I think the bottom line is that this is "just one more excuse to delay". The RO can play, "Who's on first?" with the Veteran and the BVA, with the RO's preferred result being delay. A delay of a Veterans claim is even better than a denial because the bottom line is that delayed claims dont count as denials in the numbers. I will give 2 examples: 1. My example. I was denied, then granted a complete grant of benefit sought by the BVA. RO decides that "complete" means "zero%"..even tho that is more than a little bit frowned upon by court cases. The RO knows it will loose in court, so, what do they do? They keep it out of appeals. How do they do that? Easy..they "interpreted" my NOD as a "claim for benefits". So far, they have kept me out of appeals for 5 years..and counting..that is, AFTER the BVA already granted me complete benefits. RESULT: VARO DELAYS Claims 8 years and counting. 2. A friends example. This friend has a wheel chair scooter, 2 leg braces and is obviously 100% disabled..from war wounds in Nam. He applied for benefits in 1973. He was awarded NSC pension, however, he Should be getting 100%. VARO denies, delays, shreds, deceives..for more than 35 years. Result: VARO (Cleveland) delays claim for 35 years and counting. The RO has demonstrated that they can literally delay the claim until death..and then not pay.

Munchie I am at the Cleveland RO..but have been "farmed out" to Roanoke RO. I felt the Roanoke RO service was about 10 times better than Cleveland. IN Roanoke, the guy emailed me back and forth about my claim and, unfortunately, they sent it back to cleveland for rating. Cleveland shreds about 60% of my evidence, while I have not had anything shredded at Roanoke. Also, your claim will probably go faster since you are a "new" Vet..and new Vets have priority over us Vietnam era "older" Vets. Sometimes, if things go good, new Vets can get claims done in a year or so. However, if one thing goes wrong, I think our claims go into "the dead zone"..none of the rating specialists want to work on "difficult" claims..they take longer so they just wind up in a pile and are not touched for years. Rating specialists have a quota..so many ratings per day, so they stay away from the "difficult" cases, like mine, like the plague. They "cherry pick" claims that are simple..only one issue, not a lot of medical history to read, and no IMO's. The "difficult" claims are left in the pile..appeals, multiple issues, IMO's, long medical histories, ..anything "out of the ordinary". One reason new Vets claims always go first (other than some legislation mandating it..of course, VA pays no attention to regulations..after all, they do have their agenda..)is that the medical history is less, and less reading is required..that is they take the rating specialist far less time. So, why pick an old VN vets claim, which could take six hours, when a new Vet claim may only take one hour. I have a friend in Group therapy, who applied for benefits in 1973 from a Vietnam war wounds..he is in a wheel chair with braces on his legs. They awarded him NSC pension..and he has been fighting for 100% for more than 35 years. There is really no doubt that his injuries are from the war, (and it does not take a rocket scientist to figure out he is 100%) but the Cleveland RO has made him wait more than 3 decades for his benefits anyway. His medical records are so extensive, that his claim may not fit in a wheelbarrow.

I certainly hopefull this proposed rule will not be implemented. This is a ploy to get more remands, based on the assumption that the RO does a better job with Veterans claims than the BVA/CAVC. Thousands of Veterans have been awarded benefits by the BVA/CAVC when the RO's refuse to do so. I am certain that the VARO's, who always interprets rules "against the Veteran" would follow suite on this also. If the VA didnt follow the rules in the first place, when the court cases have said, time after time, that the VA must follow its own regulations, why should we think a "remand" would do any good. The BVA needs to stop remanding..this just gives the RO still one more chance at misinterpreting and denying again. When the RO shows they are not competent to follow the rules, why should we believe a BVA remand would somehow motivate the RO to follow the rules they didnt follow earlier? The RO is much more skilled at "covering up" mistakes than they are at fixing them. When the Veteran goes to the trouble to appeal his case, and then it is remanded, most often the RO will "minimize" the Veterans benefits, if any are awarded at all.

Oldman Bottom Line: None of us know how long it will take, including the VA. In July, 2007 I got an IRIS email from the Cleveland VARO manager promising "I could expect a decision in 4-6 weeks". I did not get an answer until April 2008, about 9 months later, and even that was a denial. The VA moves at their own snails pace, and nearly all attempts to speed that up backfire. In 2004, I filed a "hardship" because I was about to be foreclosed upon. You guessed it..filing for a hardship exception slowed up my claim and it was the following year before I got a decision. It was too late, and my home and vehicle were foreclosed.

Yes, I certainly agree with Berta and Pete with just a tiny bit to add to it. After you have done these things, send an IRIS email as to what claims you have pending and what dates. Make sure what YOU think is going on with your claim is what IRIS thinks is going on. Altho IRIS is not always accurate, neither is the RO! I like the new IRIS..its done nationally and not through each individual RO. I discovered HUGE discrepencies this way..I thought I had a TDIU claim pending, IRIS says no. I thought I had appeals pending, IRIS says NO. It is ONE way you can stay on top of your claim and Identifiy, for example, if the RO has shredded your NOD. By doing this, it probably saved me at least a year. JMHO

I dont necessarily think this means your claim was "farmed out" and I will explain why, and how you can maybe find out, and why that is important. I got a recent (April 08) RO decision from Cleveland on St. Petersburg cover letter. It was signed by the manager at Cleveland..with St. Pete cover letter. What this means..my case was not "farmed out", however, the "default cover letter" probably is a red flag that "funny stuff" is going on. In other words, someone is logging into somebody elses RO account..why would they do that? Most likely: Employee fraud. Did I log into your email address? Your credit card account? Your bank account? No..and if i did, would you not be very suspicious of my reasons? Where did I get your username/password, and what other usernames/passwords of yours do I have..get my point? Oh, sure, sometimes people "share" email accounts, passwords..especially husbands and wives. But I am not sure that ONE Regional Office is authorized to log into another RO's account..that makes me very, very suspicious..especially with the VA already accused of shredding documents and faking dates. I recommend you find out..do an IRIS email and ask them if your claim was farmed out, and, if so, to who. I have had nothing but trouble with my claim..and to prevent this, I would recommend getting to the bottom of this.

Has anyone ELSE felt the VA is "doctor shopping" to find a C&P examiner to opine that a Vets claim should be denied? My "regular" doctors (who have been treating me for 7 years) have offered the opinion, essentially, that I am entitled to TDIU. However, my C&P doc, who met me LESS THAN one hour, READ THEIR records on me, and suggests that my rating is too high and should be reduced. Guess which opinion the VA cites in the decisions..the Vets regular doc (7 years) or "one hour photo" doc...yea..they go with the "one hour doc"...because it fits their agenda of the 3 D's. Sure..we can appeal this decision. But where do we send the NOD? The Regional Office who is the fox guarding the chicken house. So, what does the RO "do" with my NOD? File a SOC? No. The RO waits 4 years..until I get so mad that I file a writ of mandamus demanding action. Then, in the "Secretary's response" to the Writ, the RO manager states that my NOD was "interpreted as a claim for benefits". I dont blame you for being mad.

Carlie I thank you for your openness. I think you have definitely helped others with this. Altho I am highly unqualified to assist you with your MST, I will interject my 2cents worth in regard to your doc's "question". We are taught from age 5 or so that there are "no bad questions". This is done to encourage us to ask questions we may be "afraid" to ask, like maybe "Where is the bathroom?" That being said, I contend there ARE BAD QUESTIONS, and I will provide at least one example. One example of a Bad question would be to ask a man, "Why is your wife so ugly?" Its a bad question for at least two reasons. First, it is based on a assumption that is false,(if he thought his wife was ugly he would have not married her) and secondly, it isnt a question at all, it is an insult that is not so cleverly disguised as a question..probably to provoke a fight. In my humble opinion, your docs "question" meets the "bad question" criteria. It would appear that her "question" was not asked in the realm of treating you, but she may well have revealed a "hidden agenda" of hers within that "question". I think there is a real possibility that the docs "hidden agenda" may involve making statements to get your claim denied. She may actually be getting paid bonuses by QTC or the VA for statements that cause your claims to be reduced/denied..beleive it or not, there are bad docs in the VA, and they have committed fraud: http://www.va.gov/oig/publications/press-release.asp?id=30 is one example. Bottom line..imho..dont walk, RUN to get another doc. This doc is not treating you, she is interrogating you. You need treatment, not interrogation for crimes that you did not commit!! Hang in there..we are pulling for you! In the interest of helping other MST victims, I think you should consider reporting this docs "question" to your ombudsman/hospital administrator, etc. This question has nothing to do with your treatment and should have never been asked.

George..Welcome to hadit! I agree with Poolguy..it may/may not be difficult to "get around" secondary conditions. In theory, "secondary factors" will also be service connected to the original condition if the doctor opines something like, "Veterans heart/kidney conditions are most likely caused by AO due to military Service". In practice, this would appear to be possibly another excuse for the VARO to deny at least part of the benefits due to you. Shreddergate is alive and well, in spite of the so called ban on shredding due to the "October incident", so keep copies of everything you send the VA.

Sniper.. I see that you are new..welcome to hadit. I recommend opening a "new" post to get questions answered about your particular case as the people who answer questions may prefer to stick to "Georges" issues in this post so that things dont get confused about which Veteran we are referring to. George: We simply dont know how long it will take. There are 57 Regional Offices..some of these are better than others and faster, too. If you read the Docs c&P report, and it sounded favorable to you, that is certainly a good sign. Unfortunately, I had a C&P examinar state, "Veterans hearing loss is most likely due to military service" and still had it denied. Upon appeal, however, it was approved, in no small part due to the examiners statement. However, the Regional Office continues, in my case, to try to deny my benefits even after BVA approval. Not every one has these issues..some cases get approved cleanly without problems..and I have a Vet friend who applied for benefits in 1973, and has been in a wheel chair from war wounds for 35 years and has yet to be awarded any more than NSC Pension. (NSC Pension is about one third the amount of total disability that he deserves.) I do not like to be the bearer of bad news..however, I would rather you hear the truth from another Vet, because some VSO's will lead you down a path making you think you will get your full benefits in 6 months, and I say you have a better chance at winning the lottery than getting total disability approved by the VA in six months. JMHO