ruby

I had the same problem, however, I did finance my cars but no credit cards, I had to get credit ie home depot and a visa make payments for 3-6 months and my score jumped tremedously in the 700's. I haven't check in awhile so I am not sure what it is now. I had a home mortgage and wanted to refi, never late on my mortgage in 15 yrs but still had a hard time refi without the credit score. Home depot reports your payments immediately which is good, get something on 12 months interest free they still report it as paid on time even if you haven't made a payment. Good Luck

If it's not a workmens comp case then the civilian gets another drug, lives with the side effect, or stops taking the drug completely. The military that owns you 24/7 which casued you a medical problem and you have to take something to survive and you have side effects from that drug it should be part of your claim for more money. I have alot of pain and it is necessary for me to take pain medications and I have side effects and those side effects prevent me from working. Yes, I want p&t IU--with out the pain medication I would probably be dead now. It's a catch 22. You take it when you have too, but it leaves you dizzy, lightheadness and slowed reactions. Really want me as your nurse on drugs. I have several stomach problems and I am taking 3 types of drugs to prevent the side effect of nausea----Yes, I deserve to be compensated for this side effect. Since it is necessary for me to take those drugs due to a sc condition. That's the point it is a direct result of the service connection condition. The problem with the VA is if they did claims by thier regs and rule there wouldn't be as many vets to becoming claims junkies. When you screw with someone and violate there rights for years. Can you blame them for wanting whatever they can get. I don't. I am falling into that same category as a claims junkie. So I will read the rules and file for anything and everything I am entitled too, since they can't play by the rules. If the did the right thing the first go around the VA systme would not be in the shape its it. I see no reason to file more claims after I get IU P&T but hey they screwed with my claims put me into IMO's and NODs so game on VA.

Just had one a couple of months ago. While it is not pleasant, it's not horrible. They take a needle and place on a nerve and then they start moving to see how your nerve and muscles work. The moving of the needle is what causes the pain. The DR that did mine told me each time is was turning on the juice so I would be prepared. It's not comfortable and only one time did I say you have to stop. They will only do it once.

From what I understand it is the director of the C&P's that assigns who does your exam. It's The VARO that has to request the faulty exam to be redone. It's in the M21.

kruse did mine do, they sure are a very busy person.

Thanks to everyone for your opinions

I thought the 3 va docs saying I am unemployable due to my sc conditions would have been enough but I guess not. Thats the CUE not inferring IU but I am going to file for IU forget the CUE for now use it down the road if I have too. I am going to file the appeal at the same time as I am told that its 2 different depts and basically they don't do anything with the appeal until the reopen is complete. That's how they handled it this time. Thanks Ruby

They stated his opinion was favorable however he did have all my records to review (but he did have the pertinent records and they were documented) and the examiner stated there was no medical literature to support this claim and in his opinion my arthritis appears to be osteo and not reactive. The IMO specialist stated he review my records all of them and in his opinion the cyst were hs additional he also review other pertient records pertaining to a correlation of the hs to ReA and in his opinion it is "more likely then not" secondary to the HS. He provide the list of literation to support that HS is a know causative factor of ReA. They used part of his report regarding the cyst to hs in the desision section but totally disregarded the medical literature to support or his nexus statement for the ReA. They are complete morons and what can we expect the reading comprehension is only required to be a the 2nd grade leve.

Thanks to everyone for your input, I have been out of touch recently and haven't read my threads.

Bronco I think Carlie is saying that the statement you made "Some years ago you could not get an exam unless you were already service connected" is not true. How did someone get sc if there was no exam. I was sc in 1983 and I had a c&p I got out in 1978. You had to have a well grounded claim showing that it had to be plausible that your claim had foundation that it occurred while in the service before an exam was offered and not that you had to be sc prior to the exam. That's my take. Ruby

I sent an iris today for something and they responded in a couple of hours of course the answer was to NOD which I knew but I wrote it hoping they might look at my claim (you never can tell) they didn't. I also asked a specific question regarding rules, regs, opinion, cavc cases etc regarding medical literature--can a c&p examiner accept and read other material then what is in the medical files or c&p file during a c&p exam--they completely ignored that question. So I sent in a complaint that they didn't answer my question. We will see how long that one takes to answer

Allan, I am so sorry that the VA has put you through hell and back. Get the attorney and forget about it for a while. I was at group yesterday and my therapist stated that several male PTSD vets had lost thier cases but they got an attorney and they won 100%P&T. I guess it takes the Esquire at the end of your name to get what you should have gotten years ago. Take Care Ruby

I have a nod from 07 for IU, SI joints, Depression this can be won but it will be a fight. less evidence to support claim at that time however I have the support now (80% rating 3 md say unemployable) My new claim is for radiculopathy and headaches secondary to sc cervical arthritis according to what I think I should get 55% total R&L for the radiculopathy and 30% for headaches. If they give me those ratings I qualify for 100% secluar. I have a new NOD for another claim for reactive arthritis, a change in dx codes and eeds. I can ask the VA to cue itself for IU. Which way would get me the IU the quickest. I have held off filing the bilateral radiculopathy and headaches for close to a year waiting for this decision they screwed me. I could file a reopen claim for IU (not a cue),radiculopathy secondary to my sc arthritis and headaches secondary to sc arthrits, it is documented by my doctos my neck is causing the problems. Then I file a nod on eed for the PTSD and REA and change in dx with stage ratings. or I can file IU only and the NOD to see if they will answer me within a year. If not then I NOD I read someone where they do IU quicker, it takes just a couple of months, anyone ever hear of this. I need help deciding what to file and when---can others give me thier opinion and what they would do and why Thanks for your answers

TDIU=Total disability ratings based on individual unemployability 38 CFR 4.16 I wasn't going to be nice as it is apparent you work for the VA or a significant other does. You need to read the opinion by the general counsel (which is binding) Date: July 6, 2001 VAOPGCPREC___12-2001 From: General Counsel (022) Sub: Robinerson v. Principi, No. 00-7009, 2001 U.S. App. LEXIS 11008 (Fed. Cir. May 29, 2001) He misspelled the name it is Roberson in his opinion. This might help you understand your job better. Look at the entire case. As for the professional opinions of your doctors, unless they are willing to put their opinions in writting, they are not worth much. If you have PTSD, and their belief is that you so screwed up from the PTSD, then why not try and get 100% for PTSD instead of IU? Your story indicates you can't work due to PTSD! Your medical documentation supposedly supports you unable to work due to your PTSD, so why not go for 100% due to PTSD? Not IU!!! You should have tried both. I had 3 letters to support my claim including thier own C&P examiner--which they ignored. I do not qualify for 100% for PTSD, 38 CFR , Chapter 4, however, I do qualify for 70%. In my claim I asked for 100% based on the statements from my doctors which was an inferred claim for IU. My reasons for not working are both medical and physical, while I am on SSDI for a non service connected condition (on appeal) they are duty bound to look at the high percentage rate 80% and determine if my sc issues would keep me from maintaining a job. Again read Roberson. Once any medical professional states that the Vet is not able to maintain employment due to SC condition then it is an inferred claim for IU read Roberson. Last but not least, by inputing a 21-8920 with your appeal, you screwed up. The application for unemployability is a new claim and isn't part of the appeal. The only reason you did that is to get back pay. Your blaming others for not reading between the lines, yet you didn't see it either until later. Again, your wrong, you can not be paid for IU until 21-8920 is completed, however they can award the IU. I currently have IU on appeal from another claim, however, that is not an issue at any time IU can be awarded when you meet the requirements. I have to know the rules, regs and laws that pertain to my claims, while the rater picks and choses which ones if any they want to use then I have to file an appeal and wait 2-10 years to get it approved when it should have occurred at the RO level if they knew and applied the rules correctly.

Thanks Testvet, I remember reading somewhere an opinion or something that stated the c%p examiners could and should except medical literature or any other type of evidence to support thier claim at the c&p exam---Mine said no I can only review whats in your file. That's what I am looking for I was denied due to the c&p jerk saying no medical literature to support when he refused to look at it.

I know I read somewhere that the VA encourages the medical examiners to accept medical literature etc to support thier claims. I can't find what this information now and I need it for a NOD. I don't know if it was a BVA,CAVC decision, letter of some sort. Does anyone know if this exist and where I would find it. I was denied based on no medical literature to support, yet, the examiner refused it and the VARO ignored it --yes, it was submitted my an MD. Thanks.

This is the final I will hand carry on Tues unless others see a need for me to improve it. MOTION FOR RECONSIDERATION BASED ON CLEAR AND UNMISTAKABLE ERROR: STATEMENT IN SUPPORT OF CLAIM 1. In reference to your correspondence dated May 1, 2009 on page 3 paragraph 4, you stated "Your rating decision and this letter constitute our decision based on your claim received on February 21, 2008. It represents all claims we understood to be specifically made, implied, or inferred in that claim." This statement is incorrect, while I may have not been specific in my request on that date, it was implied/inferred that the following actions would occur. While the aforementioned paragraph is not stated for the August 2008 claim for PTSD due to personal trauma in this decision, I am sure this was an over sight on the VARO’s decision letter. TDIU was not inferred by the VARO as required by 38 C.F.R. § 4.16. Total disability ratings for compensation based on unemployability of the individual. In addition I am providing a BVA decision regarding this issue and their decision along with snipet’s of thier decision: Citation Nr: 0909205 Decision Date: 03/12/09 Archive Date: 03/26/09 DOCKET NO. 06-19 075 "the RO's failure to address the implied claim is properly challenged through a clear and unmistakable error (CUE) motion" "Additionally, as indicated previously, at the time VA received the Veteran's March 2, 2004, claim, he met the schedular threshold requirements for a TDIU rating under 38 C.F.R. § 4.16(a). Specifically, his PTSD was rated as 50 percent disabling and he had a combined disability rating of 70 percent". "Specifically, as indicated previously, the Veteran's VA psychiatrist indicated in a document dated March 1, 2004, that, at the current time, the Veteran's mental health rendered him incapable of working." "supports the fact that the Veteran's service-connected disabilities, specifically his PTSD, rendered him unemployable as of that date." In addition I have provided you with a portion of a 2001 Memorandum by the General Counsel (022) for you to review regarding this issue (full copy enclosed) In Department of Memorandum Veterans Affairs Date: July 6, 2001 VAOPGCPREC___12-2001 From: General Counsel (022) Sub: Robinerson v. Principi, No. 00-7009, 2001 U.S. App. LEXIS 11008 (Fed. Cir. May 29, 2001) HELD: The only holdings in Roberson v. Principi, No. 00-7009, 2001 U.S. App. LEXIS 11008 (Fed. Cir. May 29, 2001) are the following: 1. Once a veteran: (1) submits evidence of a medical disability; (2) makes a claim for the highest rating possible; and (3) submits evidence of unemployability, the requirement in 38 C.F.R. § 3.155(a) that an informal claim "identify the benefit sought" has been satisfied and VA must consider whether the veteran is entitled to total disability based upon individual unemployability (TDIU). 2. A veteran is not required to submit proof that he or she is 100% unemployable in order to establish an inability to maintain a substantially gainful occupation, as required for a TDIU award pursuant to 38 C.F.R. § 3. 340(a). Tim S. McClain The following evidence was submitted to support this inferred claim and is in your possession. Letters/Medical notes by Dr. Hummer Ph.D and Dr. Shriner MD . They stated I am permanently disabled by symptoms of PTSD and my prognosis is poor. These statements should have triggered TDIU. In my claim I asked for 100% rating based on these statements. I am requesting that the VARO, CUE this issue and TDIU, P&T be granted. I am including VA Form 21-8940. In accordance with 38 C.F.R. s4.3 the resolution of reasonable doubt should be applied. While I am on social security disability for a non service connected condition ( on appeal), if I did not have this condition, my PTSD symptoms and my service connected physical disabilities i.e. cervical arthritis (secondary bilateral radiculopathy claim pending), asthma, arthritis left hand and foot would prevent me from obtaining substantial gainful employment. 2. The VARO would change the dx code of 7819 to a more appropriate analogous diagnosis code dx code of 7806 and an appropriate rating be assigned with an effective date of December 2007(date the cyst were dx). In addition to the implied/inferred claim, I followed this up with correspondence that was received by by S. Clement at the St. Pete Regional Office on May 2, 2008. § 4.20 Analogous ratings. When an unlisted condition is encountered it will be permissible to rate under a closely related disease or injury in which not only the functions affected, but the anatomical localization and symptomatology are closely analogous. Conjectural analogies will be avoided, as will the use of analogous ratings for conditions of doubtful diagnosis, or for those not fully supported by clinical and laboratory findings. Nor will ratings assigned to organic diseases and injuries be assigned by analogy to conditions of functional origin. § 4.27 Use of diagnostic code numbers. The diagnostic code numbers appearing opposite the listed ratable disabilities are arbitrary numbers for the purpose of showing the basis of the evaluation assigned and for statistical analysis in the Department of Veterans Affairs, and as will be observed, extend from 5000 to a possible 9999. Great care will be exercised in the selection of the applicable code number and in its citation on the rating sheet. No other numbers than these listed or hereafter furnished are to be employed for rating purposes, with an exception as described in this section, as to unlisted conditions. When an unlisted disease, injury, or residual condition is encountered, requiring rating by analogy, the diagnostic code number will be "built-up" as follows: The first 2 digits will be selected from that part of the schedule most closely identifying the part, or system, of the body involved; the last 2 digits will be "99" for all unlisted conditions. This procedure will facilitate a close check of new and unlisted conditions, rated by analogy. In the selection of code numbers, injuries will generally be represented by the number assigned to the residual condition on the basis of which the rating is determined. With diseases, preference is to be given to the number assigned to the disease itself; if the rating is determined on the basis of residual conditions, the number appropriate to the residual condition will be added, preceded by a hyphen. § 4.7 Higher of two evaluations. Where there is a question as to which of two evaluations shall be applied, the higher evaluation will be assigned if the disability picture more nearly approximates the criteria required for that rating. Otherwise, the lower rating will be assigned. Hidradenitis Suppurative is a disease of the apocrine glands that produces infected cyst which leads to scarring. This condition should be rated as a hyphenated dx code; it is both a disease process dx code 7806 and residual condition of scarring- dx code 7819. In accordance with 38 U.S.C.S. statute 5107 (a). Additionally, I have included BVA decisions that support this change in diagnosis. Citation Nr: 0639017 Decision Date: 12/14/06 Archive Date: 01/04/07 DOCKET NO. 98-03 459 Citation Nr: 0705665 Decision Date: 02/28/07 Archive Date: 03/05/07 DOCKET NO. 04-24 826 Citation Nr: 0840504 Decision Date: 11/24/08 Archive Date: 12/03/08 DOCKET NO. 06-22 355 Citation Nr: 0805540 Decision Date: 02/15/08 Archive Date: 02/26/08 DOCKET NO. 03-17 092 I am currently prescribed by the Dermatologist near constant antibiotic therapy since December 2007. I currently take Doxycycline 50 mg bid, benzoyl peroxide solution qd, tretinoin 0.1% q pm and sun screen while taking the doxycycline. I have frequent yeast infections, constipation and stomach distress while taking the doxycycline. The doxycline was first prescribed by Dr Vasey MD, Chief of Rheumatology, at James A. Haley VA, in Tampa, Florida in December 2007 for the diagnosis of Hidradenitis Suppurative. He then referred me to Surgery which referred me to Dermatology for medical management of this condition that is now service connected.

I can't remember where this is in the 38 cfr so you will have to look for it. There are several circumstances where they are not suppose to schedule a C&P, one of them is over the age of 55. Look for the rules that govern this subject and have the friend write a letter to the VA reminding them of the rules and ask them to cancel the exam. If they (probably won't) then he needs to go. Whatever he is disabled for he needs to look at the criteria to keep that rating.

I don't know how to start this CUE/Recon, I know I can't reconsider without new evidence which I don't have at this time, I don't want to say CUE yourself morons so any help is appreciated. STATEMENT IN SUPPORT OF CLAIM-RECONSIDERATION The following is submitted for reconsideration for the reasons stated below. 1. In reference to your correspondence dated May 1, 2009 on page 3 paragraph 4, you stated "Your rating decision and this letter constitute our decision based on your claim received on February 21, 2008. It represents all claims we understood to be specifically made, implied, or inferred in that claim." This statement is incorrect, while I may have not been specific in my request on that date, it was implied/inferred that the following actions would occur. The VARO would change the dx code of 7819 to a more appropriate analogous diagnosis code dx code of 7806 and an appropriate rating be assigned with an effective date of December 2007. In addition to the implied/inferred claim, I followed this up with correspondence that was received by by S. Clement at the St. Pete Regional Office on May 2, 2008. This letter was not noted in the evidence section of the decision. Hidradenitis Suppurative is a disease of the apocrine glands that produces infected cyst which leads to scarring. This condition should be rated as both a disease process and scarring. In accordance with 38 U.S.C.S. statute 5107 (a). I am currently prescribed by the Dermatologist near constant antibiotic therapy Doxycycline 50 mg bid, benzoyl peroxide solution qd, tretinoin 0.1% q pm and sun screen while taking the doxycycline. I have frequent yeast infections, constipation and stomach distress while taking the doxycycline. The doxycline was first prescribed by Dr Vasey MD, Chief of Rheumatology, at James A. Haley VA, in Tampa, Florida in December 2007 for the diagnosis of Hidradenitis Suppurative. He then referred me to Surgery which referred me to Dermatology for medical management of this condition that is now service connected. 2. The aforementioned paragraph is not stated under the August 2008 claim for PTSD due to personal trauma, I am sure this was an over sight on the VARO’s decision letter. TDIU was not inferred by the VARO as required by 38 C.F.R. § 4.16. Total disability ratings for compensation based on unemployability of the individual. In addition I have provided you with a portion of a 2001 Memorandum by the General Counsel (022) for you to review regarding this issue (full copy enclosed) In Department of Memorandum Veterans Affairs Date: July 6, 2001 VAOPGCPREC___12-2001 From: General Counsel (022) Sub: Robinerson v. Principi, No. 00-7009, 2001 U.S. App. LEXIS 11008 (Fed. Cir. May 29, 2001) HELD: The only holdings in Roberson v. Principi, No. 00-7009, 2001 U.S. App. LEXIS 11008 (Fed. Cir. May 29, 2001) are the following: 1. Once a veteran: (1) submits evidence of a medical disability; (2) makes a claim for the highest rating possible; and (3) submits evidence of unemployability, the requirement in 38 C.F.R. § 3.155(a) that an informal claim "identify the benefit sought" has been satisfied and VA must consider whether the veteran is entitled to total disability based upon individual unemployability (TDIU). 2. A veteran is not required to submit proof that he or she is 100% unemployable in order to establish an inability to maintain a substantially gainful occupation, as required for a TDIU award pursuant to 38 C.F.R. § 3. 340(a). Tim S. McClain The following evidence was submitted to support this inferred claim and is in your possession. Letters/Medical notes by Dr. Hummer Ph.D and Dr. Shriner MD . They stated I am permanently disabled by symptoms of PTSD and my prognosis is poor. These statements should have triggered TDIU. In my claim I asked for 100% rating based on these statements. I am requesting that the VARO readdress this issue and TDIU, P&T be granted. I am including VA Form 21-8940. In accordance with 38 C.F.R. s4.3 the resolution of reasonable doubt should be applied. While I am on social security disability for a non service connected condition ( on appeal), if I did not have this condition, my PTSD symptoms and my service connected physical disabilities i.e. cervical arthritis, asthma, arthritis left hand and foot would prevent me from obtaining substantial gainful employment.

According to my research Wings is correct. I think I found a loop hole in my decision but I am not sure what to title the request. I am essentially telling them to cue themselves but I do not want to use those words. 1. In reference to your correspondence dated May 1, 2009 on page 3 paragraph 4, you stated "Your rating decision and this letter constitute our decision based on your claim received on February 21, 2008. It represents all claims we understood to be specifically made, implied, or inferred in that claim." Does this appear to be loop hole for me to address some issues? In a letter dated April 29, 2008, I asked that the diagnostic code of 7819 (cyst, rated as scar) be changed to a more analogous diagnostic code of 7806 which more closely approximates the true disability that I suffer and an appropriate rating would be assigned, this letter was received by S. Clement on May 2, 2008. etc (this was never addressed in the evidence) The also did not infer TDIU which is required at 80% (this is a cue)I am stating in this letter the CFR rules and the M21 rules they ignored----basically they did not finish rating this claim. I can't appeal a claim that is not decided. They completely ignored some evidence according to m21--- 11. Reasons for Decision, Continued b. Reviewing and Evaluating Evidence Rating decisions must · concisely cite and evaluate all evidence that is relevant and necessary to the determination, including - testimony given under oath, and - certified statements submitted by claimants · clearly explain why that evidence is found to be persuasive or unpersuasive, and · address all pertinent evidence and all of the claimant's contentions. They totally ignored 1 MD and the medical treatise he provided to support his nexus-I am sure they will say that his opinion is not relevant since he is giving an opinion on a disease that is not his expertise-when in reality what he did was state his expert opionion the primary condition (his field) has been linked to the secondary condition and here's the proof. This is revelant. I personally would like the RO to CUE himself if possible any takers on how to get this done if at all possible.Thanks Ruby

Yoggie, I wish the best however the VA can screw almost anything up. I have a gaf of 46-my symptology is in the 70% range and 3 docs said I was not employable due to my PTSD. I got 50% PTSD, no IU, they didn't even infer IU or include it in my rating decision. I hope your RO is better then mine. Ruby

Congratulations. Ruby

While looking at my award/denial letter I realized that nothing had dx codes, so I called the 1-800 and asked them for the dx codes---- My HS was sc as cyst/scars but it is an actual disease process, I asked to have it changed they didn't change it, so that explains to me why I got 0% for it, I should have gotten at least 10%. So now in my recon/nod I am going to ask for 60% for near constant to constant immunosuppressive drugs. I am on near constant antibotic therapy which will eventually lead to my demise (MRSA,VRE) if the PTSD doesn't get to me sooner. I really did have a simply no brainer claim the VA has turned into a nightmare.

I called the 1800 number to clarify the virtual review statement they aren't 100% sure what it really means as it is new lingo for them.