broncovet

Belle, I just noticed something in YOUR NOD that you posted. There are two things required of a NOD: 1. Veteran expresses disagreement or dissatisfaction with VARO decision. 2. The Veteran desires to contest the result. (Maybe someone can look up the NOD regulations, I am doing this from memory) When you file your NOD, (and I certainly recommend you do exactly that..sooner is better than later but NEVER wait more than a year) make sure you have those two elements. I recommend you specify either (as in number two above): The Veteran desires to contest the result with a Decision Officer Review. (Of course, you can also elect to skip the Decision officer Review and go straight to the BVA. In that case, state something like "The VEteran waives the right to a decision officer review and elects instead for a BVA appeal") I recommend you CHANNEL YOUR ANGER into doing a great job stating your case with the NOD. I have been working on perfecting my NOD for MONTHS. The BVA (or DRO) will read your NOD, but may not read other stuff in your file. So make your case very clear. State exactly why you think your hubby should get a higher rating. Copy down the criteria for the disability rating you are trying to achieve. If you look it up, you can find the criteria for a 70%PTSD depression rating, for example, if you are seeking TDIU. Then, look through your hubbies entire medical records and LOOK FOR THINGS that the doctor said about your hubbys med exams that support your position of a 70% (or 100% rating) using the rating criteria. In my case, I am alleging the Regional Office "mishandled" evidence. (See fast letter 08-41) That is, they failed to cosider certain evidence through 5 regional office decisions, one DRO review and one BVA appeal. I stated it this way: This medical exam documents the Veterans 2002 claims for depression and TDIU, and, reveals the Veterans suicidal ideation's. The evidence of the Veterans suicidal ideation's was NOT considered in any Regional Office decisions. Instead, the Regional Office, in the 2005 decision rated the Veterans depression as if the Veteran had no suicidal ideation's, because suicidal ideation's are present only in the rating criteria for 70% and higher disability ratings. The Regional office rated the Veteran's depression at 30% and offered no explanations as to why it would be rated at 30% when the criteria would indicate that suicidal ideation's would warrant a minimum 70% rating. Surely, the issue of this medically documented evidence of the Veteran considering taking his own life would be worthy of consideration if this evidence were known at the time of the ratings review! The suggestion that the Regional Office knew of the Veterans suicidal ideation's but did not deem that information important enough to be included in the decision would both insult and trivialize the Veterans life. It is simply unacceptable for the Regional Office to consider the Veterans own life so trivial that it was unworthy of consideration when evaluating the Veterans depression ratings. I hope this helps. I am in nearly the same boat you are in. Good luck.

The thing you need to learn is this: The most important determing factor in evaluating your claim is your location. Not the evidence, not how well you fill out the form, not your Veterans service officer, but which state you live in and which regional Office you file in. Some regional offices are very chintzy in awarding benefits and others are more Veteran friendly. This is NOT a rumor or my idea, but the Attorney General's evaluation of the disparity among states. One article explaining it is here: http://blog.cleveland.com/openers/2008/04/...k_vasil_of.html

I have been SC'd for hearing loss, and there is no record on my military exams of hearing loss. My audioligist offered the opinion, "hearing loss is most likely related to military service". Of course, the regional office denied my claim, but the BVA pointed out that the rating officer can not make a judgement call about my hearing loss that trumps a qualified audiologist. ONLY a qualifed audiologist can dispute that statement, and, even then, if two audiologists differ in their opinion, then the "favor the Veteran rule" should apply. In a nutshell, you need to visit an audiologist, if you havent already, and ask him/her for this opinion, and explain your reasons. If you live in a "Veteran friendly state" then you will probably be successful. I got mine through even tho I am in a very Veteran unfriendly state, Ohio. (Ohio ranks second to last in its benefits to Veterans, according to the Attorney general report) You can find it here: http://blog.cleveland.com/openers/2008/04/...k_vasil_of.html

Belle Even tho I cant say as I blame you for being mad, there is a "silver lining" in all this. You got a decision from 2008, even tho it was bad, it was still a decision and you can now move on to appeal. My case is worse, I cant even get a decision on an appeal from 2004. The Cleveland Regional Office "misinterpreted my NOD as a claim for benefits" so, I am not even able to appeal UNLESS this interpretation is overturned. That is unlikely to happen, since the Regional Office decides how it interprets stuff. They are free to interpret anything in a manner that is consistent with their own agenda. It is like having the wolf stand guard over the hen house when we send NOD's to the Regional Office for "consideration". I wonder how many Veterans NOD's got shredded or misinterpreted, like mine.

I think your disability rating will be based on, in this order: 1) Your location..VARO's in Ohio, Illinois, or Indiana will rate you lower than New Mexico or Maine, for example. Its kind of like shopping for a home..if you want a good home, go to a nice area of town. If you want an honest disability rating, move to a "Veteran Friendly" state. 2) The rating specialist. Some of them are much more generous than others, and that will largely be determined by the "luck of the draw". Some have "good days" and bad days. 3) Lastly, by the facts. The facts are not nearly as important as #1 above, according to the Attorney Generals report of the disparity between states. So, if you are in one of the "bad states", get ready to appeal. If you are in a "good" state, then you may not have to appeal.

[i dont know about Illinois, but in Ohio a spouse AUTOMATICALLY owns half of what the other owns. I think the legal term is Dowry. For example if you got a divorce, your husband would own half the house regardless of whose name it was in. I am no lawyer/expert, to be sure,I dont see how they could claim the home is half his in a divorce, but NOT half his in regard to taxes. He either has ownership in the home or not, and if he had ownership in the case of divorce, then he would have ownership in the case of taxes. You MIGHT just be able to solve the problem by doing a quit claim deed..sign the house over from YOU, to both of you to resolve the dispute. You definately need to get in touch with a lawyer before you do that, tho.

Yes, isnt it sad, that, after we get back from fighting the enemy, we have to fight the VA even harder to get what is coming to us. Sometimes I think the VARO should be moved to Iraq and "take care" of their Veterans and get them to commit suicide, like they do our Veterans by frustrating us in poverty all these years.

I do not recommend waiting out of fear that it will hold up your other claims. I recommend you apply now, and establish an effective date. The longer you wait, the less money you will get. I say that because I did exactly that myself. Learning the hard way, it did not speed up my claim. NOTHING SPEEDS UP A VA CLAIM. I wrote them and told them I was about to be homeless, please speed up my claim. They delayed my claim more, trying to decide if my claim was worthy of a priority status. The VA works on a 3 D system. Delay, Deny, Discredit. Only the 7 P's can beat the 3D's. The seven P's are: Proper Preperation Prevents Poor Performance. Then aPPEAL. Then Persist. It really is an endurance contest with the VA. It really is better for some people to give up..you have to fight for every nickel with the VA. Decide if it is going to be worth a minimum of a five year fight for your benefits. Mine is going on its seventh year and no end in sight. What they did with me, is they denied..I appealed. DRO review..denied again. I appealed. BVA approved. Regional Office grants zero percent. I appeal. Regional office misinterprets appeal as claim for benefits and awards 40%. I file writ of mandamus demanding they do something with 2004 NOD in 2008. They said my appeal was interpreted as a benefit claim. I appeal that decision, demonstrating that my NOD met regulations for an NOD. It goes on, and on and on...they fight you tooth and nail even after you win at the BVA. They will spend $100,000 on lawyers to keep from spending $10,000 worth of benefits to you. Its the government way.

Hugh Really, no one helped me..I did it on my own. I would recommend, however, a NATIONAL DAV service officer in your area. They have the best training.

I have been approved for SC to hearing loss. Of course, the regional office denied it. The BVA, however, approved it upon appeal. When I appealed, I did my homework. I showed that San Diego California NTSC was right at the base of the airport, where planes land and take off constantly. To do this, I used google maps, and printed a map of the SSC and noted its close proximity to the end of the runway and my barracks. Next, I pointed out that my audiologist stated, "the most likely cause of the Veterans hearing loss was military service". If your VA audiologist didnt/wont do that, then get a more "Veteran friendly" audiologist who will. Explain to the audioligist that you were exposed to excessive noise in the military, and were not offered hearing protection if that is the case. You can also mention that you do not work in a particulary noisy environment (if that is the case) and that you dont listen to loud music. Be 100% truthfull, as I was, and offer "evidence" to your audiologist. Remember, that the average hearing impaired person simply lives with their hearing loss for about ten years before doing anything about it, such as getting hearing aids. Your hearing loss will be measured by the audiologist, and will offer indusputable proof of hearing loss. Service connection will be the issue..that is, if you have documented hearing loss as measured by your audiologist. The Regional Office regurarly fails to consider ALL evidence(as required by regulations)..that is, in my case the evidence that the audiologist opined that my hearing loss was most likely due to military service. The regulations state that a layperson, such as a rating service rep can NOT overide this audiology opinion WITHOUT compelling medical evidence to the contrary. That is, they cant just say, I think you hear fine, I dont care what the audiologist says, even tho that has happened to me. Even a medical doctor cannot dispute the audiologist findings, unless, that doctor is also qualified in audiology. In other words a degree in Psychology does not mean that a doctor can dispute a qualified audiologists opinion. If you look at your old audio reports, and the audiologist offered the opinion that the Veterans hearing loss was most likely due to exposure in the military, then you could have a "CUE (clear unmistakable error) claim". That is, if the regional office failed to consider that pertinent information in evaluating your claim, then that is CUE, as they are required to consider all evidence. If they have conflicting evidence that "trumps" the audiologist report, then they must state what it is in "reasons for decision". For example, if you had 3 audiologists, and one of them said it was military service but the other two said it was because you played drums in a rock band, then they have effectively "refuted" what the first audioligist said. However, if ONE audiologist says military related and the other says no, then it is a tie, and the regulations require a "favor the Veteran" attitude. That is the doctrine of "equipose". A Veteran is not required to prove his claim beyond a reasonable doubt, but only has to meet a lesser standard "at least as likely as not". We do not have to have 4 witnesses that were there when a bomb went off in a bunker that trashed our hearing to prove it. An opinion, from a qualified audiologist, that the hearing loss was "at least 50% likely due to military service will work", at least upon appeal even tho the regional office will probably turn it down. The BVA is much more thorough. Hope this helps.

Dont feel like the lone ranger of Veterans who have had problems with their Veterans Service Representative. I received a letter from the VFW indicating they were dropping representation in my case because they didnt like my chances of being approved. I am very glad I did not listen to them, as I have been approved, at least partially, no thanks to the VFW. I think they "cherry pick" Veterans who have legs blown off and just dont want to work difficult cases because they can. They made it clear that their purpose is not to serve Veterans, but rather to bolster their own numbers and receive "attaboys". Whenever someone tells you "they are with the government and are here to help you" we Vets had better get the vaseline jar, because where they put that information is gonna hurt.

I agree with Basser, get a copy of the denial letter if you dont have one. Even though the one year appeal period expired, there is always the possibility of a Clear, Unmistakable, Error (CUE) claim, altho the "CUE" standard is more difficult to prove than a "regular" appeal. However, in the event of CUE, the one year maximum appeal period no longer applies. I suggest you look up, at hadit, CUE claims to determine if it applies to your claim. Without the denial letter and other relevant details of your case contained in your Cfile, none of us can determine, for sure, if there is CUE or not.

Hugh I dont recommend you giving up just yet. First, request a complete copy of your C file and Service medical Records, if you havent already. Remember this may take months, so file a NOD now, just in case, so that it is timely. After you get these, comb through them thoroughly. Make sure that YOUR records are consistent with the records the VARO had for you. Reason: If you dont already know this, Dr. Peake has admitted that at least 500 Veterans claims records were shredded. (the actual number is probably way, way, higher as it includes only 4 regional offices. Many of the other VARO's are guilty also, it is just that no Veterans from other VARO's have gotten mad enough to file papers with the VAOIG yet) Dr. Peake has said that Veterans who beleive that evidence may have been shredded in their claim may request "Special Claims Handling". Even if there is no evidence of the above, look for evidence that the Regional Office violated regulations. Pour over CFR 38, and both CAVC and BVA cases where other Veterans have won. I even suggest you try google and hadit searches for things like "Veterans Affairs tinnitus claims" then try that again at both the CAVC site as well as the BVA. If you find evidence that another Veteran won a similar case, then cite that case in your appeal. Finally, if none of the above works, contact a Veterans lawyer and see if HE can see something you cant. He may be able to find a "legal loophole" where you get your Retro that you overlooked. Remember, our legal system is flawed with loopholes.such as OJ getting away with murder and then going to prison for stealing his own stuff back. Go on with your life in the interim and dont hold your breath waiting to win your case but be persistent..we had to fight a tough enemy in the war, and now the VA is another tough enemy. Get your boots on and get ready to fight what could be the toughest fight of your life.

Nine years is pretty bad. I have gone almost 7 years and I am probably further away from getting many of my benefits than I was seven years ago. My case will probably take at least 14 years. I would like to know whose claim is the oldest in history..we should send the VARO a "Certificate of Bad Treatment to Veterans" from Guiness Book of World Records on the slowest claim in history. I was awarded a "complete grant of benefit sought" by the BVA in early 2004. Instead of BVA compliance, the regional office "interpreted" this to mean I was to get zero percent of one of the benefits sought and a secret denial of all of the other benefts. I filed a Notice of Disagreement, but the Regional Office decided to "interpret" my NOD as a claim for benefits, so they can just ignore the NOD, also.

I agree, poolguy. For the VA to suggest that Veterans dont need representation, is like Hitler saying that Jews dont need any human rights inspections in his concentration camps. The trouble is that most Veterans can not afford a lawyer, and, of course, the VA takes full advantage of that fact. It is sad that we should have a need for a lawyer in obtaining our benefits. These benefits SHOULD be given to the Veteran without a lawyer, however, that is often not the case. Right now, the system favors the Veteran who is connected well enough to obtain a "pro bono" attorney. There is also a "luck of the draw", too. If a Veteran is lucky enough to have "drawn" a Rating Specialist who is fair, and a Regional Office that is fair, they are much more likely to obtain benefits. However, many of the rating specialists are downright stingy. I would love to see the "tables turned" and the Rating Specialists paychecks determined by Veterans they have served. I wonder how many "lost NOD's" we would have if the Regional Office bigshots bonuses were adversely affected by each "lost NOD"?

Unfortunately, this system is set up so that the wolf guards the hen house. When you send a NOD to the Regional Office, they can simply disregard it entirely, like they did mine. When I finally got so mad that the Cleveland Regional Office failed to take action on my NOD that I filed a Writ of Mandamus, the Regional Office responded that my NOD was "interpreted as a claim for benefits". The Regional Office has no accountability..how do you think they got away with shredding these documents all these years? The Regional Office "interprets" regulations in a manner consistent with their own agenda. That is, if they just plain dont like you, then they "interpret" the regulations in a manner unfavorable to the Veteran. Remember the regulation "favor the Veteran"? They interpret this one as "forget the Veteran", and, unfortunately, we cant do anything about it except send a NOD to the Regional Office which winds up in the "We dont have any record of your NOD" file. As mentioned, whenever the wolf guards the hen house, you have a conflict of interest.

Nothing lasts forever! Yes, if your C and P examiner says you have improved, then you could loose benefits. There is a procedure they are supposed to follow for a reduction..however, since the VARO is the "wolf guarding the hen house" the VARO decides if they followed that reduction process or not. That is, they can say, "there are the same number of chickens here that was here yesterday" even if they have chicken blood on their face, and, sure, you can appeal. My NOD was "interpreted as a claim for benefits" so now the wolf says there are no missing chickens. There is no accountability in the VA..THEY decide what is a NOD and what isnt. It will help if you are over 55 years old. They arent supposed to reduce your rating if you are. However, always remember, they are gaurding the hen house and they decide if they are following regulations or not.

Congratulations! Interestingly, I also applied for benefits in the same month you did, April 2002, and my claim has yet to be settled even tho I won a "complete grant of benefit sought" from the BVA in 2004. The Cleveland Regional Office has used every trick in the book to try to minimize/deny my benefits for as long as possible. One trick they used is they "interpreted" my 2004 Notice of Disagreement as a "claim for benefits" so they ignored my appeal! Did you have a lawyer? If anyone knows a good one, I would like his name and number. My guess is that my case will take at least another 6 years, since the end is no where in sight. Maybe I will go for the guiness book of World records for the slowest VA claim in history.

Can someone explain a De Novo Review? Is a De Novo in addition to a DRO appeal, or is it instead of a DRO Review? Also, is their an advantage to a DRO hearing? I am guessing that a hearing would take longer, but is it worth the wait?

Cleveland VARO The inspector General says, and I agree, that the Cleveland Regional Office compensates its Veterans lower than all other states. This is an average over millions of Veterans. Cleveland looses files, ignores claims, and boasts of a high accuracy rate which is false. They are very slow, and, if you complain, it will be even slower. Claims are lowballed only when they cant be denied entirely. Evidence in Cleveland means less than political clout. Cleveland will "farm out" your claim as a delay tactic. You see, when they "farm out" your claim, the other regional office makes no decisions..the Regional Office they farm it out to is not allowed to make a decision, only to "gather information". They then send it back to Cleveland to deny or lowball your claim, whatever the case may be. "Farming out" claims is supposed to be a method of reducing the backlog, when it actually increases it. Cleveland "farmed out" my claim to Roanoke, Virginia. Roanoke did a good job of gather information, but then Cleveland sits on it for over a year Once you get on Clevelands "black list" your claims will be delayed, denied, lowballed, or even lost entirely.

The DAV has the position that a Veteran should not have to pay an attorney to get from the VA what is due him. I disagree with the DAV position and here is why. Who should decide if you should hire an attorney to collect your money? The DAV? Washington Politicians? Your dog? None of these. THE VETERAN, and ONLY the Veteran should decide whether or not he needs an attorney. Veterans have fought for freedoms, such as the right to an attorney and deserve these rights for themselves, without the DAV trying to take them away. YOU know your case, your bills and committments, your family issues better than any of us. You have responsibility to take care of your family, not the DAV. AS such, you should decide wheter or not it is in your best interest to give up about a quarter of your future "retro" benefits by hiring a lawyer. You should be able to spend that money as YOU see fit, and that includes hiring a lawyer to get it. Some Vets, no doubt, dont want to have anything to do with a lawyer. Maybe they are even a lawyer themselves, or opt to do it themselves, or have non lawyers help them. Other Vets, maybe they have been through the ringer and say enough is enough, bring on the lawyers. Maybe their DAV or other service officer was ineffective. Sure the DAV has statistics that they can get more money than a lawyer. However, someone once said that 90% of all statistics are wrong 50% of the time. I say if the DAV was 100% effective, then all claims throught the DAV would be approved the first time (WITHOUT APPEAL) and no VET would WANT to pay a lawyer. Even then, if the Vet wanted to spend his money on lawyers, or bubble gum, I say he earned his disability compensation, so he should decide how to spend it. For me, I am, like you, seriously considering a lawyer. I have been through 6 years, and several Veterans Service Officers. The VFW "dropped" my case..several years ago.."they" didnt think I had a good chance of winning. I am glad I did not listen to them. I hear they often drop difficult to prove cases, so that makes their success rate higher. My suggestion is that you try a NATIONAL SERVICE Officer first (because, in my opinion, they are better trained than local yokels). If you dont get the result you want, hire a lawyer to get your money. If the lawyer doesnt do right by you, fire him, and hire another.

Halos Looked up "De Novo" but there was not very much about it. I appreciate your advice. My decision was recent, in April 08. I have already filed NOD and asked for DRO. Is it too late to ask for "De Novo review"? I appreciate any additional info on de novo review.

Berta Thank you for your answers. Is anyone out there familiar with SC for sleep apnea? I was denied SC even tho I am on a CPAP. In the denial, they said that I was not diagnosed with it in service, so they are denying it. I have never claimed to have had it in service. Rather, it goes like this: SC for depression. Anti depressant medications have side effect of weight gain. Excessive weight or, more specifically, excessive tissue in my throat, causes my airway to be blocked during sleep. Therefore, sleep apnea should be SC because antidepressant medications caused weight gain causing sleep apnea. Has anyone else been service connected for something secondary due to medications? Thanks

Berta Thank you for your answers. Is anyone out there familiar with SC for sleep apnea? I was denied SC even tho I am on a CPAP. In the denial, they said that I was not diagnosed with it in service, so they are denying it. I have never claimed to have had it in service. Rather, it goes like this: SC for depression. Anti depressant medications have side effect of weight gain. Excessive weight or, more specifically, excessive tissue in my throat, causes my airway to be blocked during sleep. Therefore, sleep apnea should be SC because antidepressant medications caused weight gain causing sleep apnea. Has anyone else been service connected for something secondary due to medications? Thanks

I am a 40% SC Vet whose increase and TDIU were both recently denied. I have been unable to work for 6 years. Shortly after this denial, I was succussful at my Social Security disability hearing, and was awarded full SS benefits. I have already issued a NOD and am electing to go through the DRO appeal. I did this, because, in my opinion, I am looking for SOMEONE to say yes..first the VARO, next the DRO, then the BVA, and finally CAVC, if necessary to go that far. ( I heard someone say "NEVER GIVE UP") I am guessing that, through the appeal process, they wont take any benefits away that were given earlier, but I dont know that for sure. My question is will a social security disability award help with my VA claim? That is, if one branch of the government says I am fully disabled, can another branch say I am not fully disabled but only 40%? The VA admits that I am Service Connected, and that I am P&T for PENSION, but not for TDIU. It seems to be a bit of a "slight of hand" for them to say I am service connected 40%, but then eligible for a NON SERVICE connected pension P&T. I guess they are saying 60% of my disabilities are non service connected, I just dont know how they seperate depression into service connected part and non service connected part of depression. I kind of thought you were either service connected for depression or not, I didnt think you could be part. Thanks for your help