Jump to content


HadIt.com Elder
  • Posts

  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

  • Donations


Vync last won the day on June 6

Vync had the most liked content!

About Vync

  • Birthday October 15

Contact Methods

  • Website URL
  • ICQ

Profile Information

  • Military Rank
  • Location
    Ft.Living Room, AL
  • Interests
    Family, fishing, movies, video games, gardening, hot rods, computer programming, electronics, music

Previous Fields

  • Service Connected Disability
    100% P&T
  • Branch of Service

Recent Profile Visitors

6,668 profile views

Vync's Achievements

Grand Master

Grand Master (14/14)

  • Very Popular Rare
  • Week One Done
  • One Month Later
  • One Year In
  • First Post

Recent Badges




Community Answers

  1. Sounds very promising! If you have a VSO with a POA, they can look in the system and tell you exactly what that is. My informed delivery email from USPS is a bit odd. It might show three items due to arrive. I get one in the mailbox, then hours later the other two arrive. The previous administration forced the USPS to change how they operate. They used to only do one delivery per day then go back to the post office and do whatever. They were forced to perform multiple deliveries per day, at least around here according to my post office clerk.
  2. Per M21-1, "static" is mentioned about 10 times during this article. It describes to handle various scenarios from P&T/TDIU vets, failure to report for exams, etc... so it's worth exploring further M21-1, Part III, Subpart iv, Chapter 8, Section E - Other Due Process Concerns Article ID: 554400000014215 https://www.knowva.ebenefits.va.gov/system/templates/selfservice/va_ssnew/help/customer/locale/en-US/portal/554400000001018/content/554400000014215/M21-1,-Part-III,-Subpart-iv,-Chapter-8,-Section-E---Other-Due-Process-Concerns#:~:text=Definition%3A Static Disability,or not it has improved. Based on that and some mild skimming of the article, it appears that if they are P&T/TDIU or had certain other rating protections, then they would not re-eval. Additionally, be sure to let them know they should review medical evidence from 12 months -prior- to requesting increase. If they meet the criteria of an increased percentage during that time, the VA -should- use that as the effective date of the increase. I filed for an increase and the effective date awarded was the C&P date. The VA mishanded my evidence. I resent that and they corrected it. Of course, that was under the older system. Nowadays it would be handled via supplemental.
  3. @asknod I can tell you that your stress test results are a lot better than mine (pre-MI 68%, during MI: 31%, post MI: 71% w/10% tissue damage). After looking at your results, my unprofessional opinion (you learn a lot about the heart after having a heart attack/MI): EF = Ejection fraction is a measurement, expressed as a percentage, of how much blood the left ventricle pumps out with each contraction. myocardium = muscular heart tissue distal = away from the center of the heart or from where RCA is attached RCA territory = right coronary artery (supplies the right side of the heart) localization = where it may originate The "ABNORMALITY, ATTN. NEEDED" appears to advise the doc to keep an eye on it. Definitely ask the VA doc about it. The EF is a bit on the high side. Normal is 50% to 70%. An EF over 75% may indicate a heart condition such as hypertrophic cardiomyopathy. With that, the left ventricle may contract harder and become thicker/stiffer than normal. It is often genetic and could lead to an eventual reduction of EF. Of course, it could very well be something else or nothing. For what it's worth, aall of my stress tests have shown mild mitral valve regurgitation (before/after my heart attack). But VA heart docs have never came out and told me anything about it. I ask them and they just say they will keep an eye on it or I can let them know if my pains worsen.
  4. @blahsaysme2u I have an active appeal at the BVA for the S-DVI stuff. I can get more info to you about this later this week.
  5. This is one DC which needs to be updated to reflect reality for many veterans who meet all criteria for 50% except the economic inadaptability factor. I'm at 30% and have to lay in bed with the lights off to recover at least one or two times a week. My employer understands and lets me make up any lost work. Due to my heart attack, I can no longer take the migraine medications which reduced the frequency to just a couple of times a month. I meet all the criteria for 50% except the "...and prolonged attacks productive of severe economic inadaptability". They should either add a 40% rating for other veterans who are in my same situation or change the 50% criteria to read "...and/or prolonged attacks productive of severe economic inadaptability".
  6. @HamsliceI am not 100% certain, but the 2.7% pay raise unfortunately would have no impact on our VA compensation rates. @john999 is correct that the VA compensation rates have generally been increased by COLA raises. I wonder if anyone has tried to compare the average military pay rates with the VA 100% P&T rates over the years... Last year, I placed a down payment on a new construction house. Fortunately, the lumber order was placed at that time so I was not impacted by the subsequent increase in lumber costs. If someone were to purchase the exact same house now, the cost has increased by about $30,000 due to the increase in lumber prices. The builder also modified the new contracts so the buyer would have to pay for any additional lumber price increases. I listened to the news this morning and they said the lumber shortage was expected to continue for the next six to 12 months.
  7. Sounds promising! As info, if you have a VSO who has access to VBMS, they should be able to get that letter for you. When I received my last decision letter, I literally drove over and they printed it out.
  8. I am not an expert, but I do not believe they will combine them. The legacy appeal at the BVA uses some different rules than claims that were filed after the rules were changed in 2019.
  9. @broncovetIt looks like the version of 38 U.S. Code § 5110 you posted is relatively recent because it mentions "supplemental claim". @add55p indicated the first diagnosis of the secondary condition was 2010. If an error was made, would it recommended for him to look up the version of 38 U.S. Code § 5110 that was in effect at that time in conjunction with any other laws/regs pertaining to inferred and/or informal claims?
  10. @Berta If your bill passes, perhaps a similar bill is necessary involving accountability of C&P examiners... @Buck52 After winning SC for heart attack secondary to side effects of migraine meds, I agree with you to a great extent. It will be interesting to see if I will win my FTCA. I rely on VA services only to a certain extent. However, I can do that because I have other private health insurance and can go to experienced non-VA docs who have treated me for years. For veterans lucky enough to be granted community care treatment referrals, it is a decent alternative but it bogged down with procedural red tape.
  11. Reasonable doubt is actually part of the regulations the VA is supposed to factor in. If the evidence in favor is in balance with evidence against, the VA is supposed to find in favor of the veteran. However, just having an opinion is not always good enough by itself. A few years ago, I filed a claim and included an "as likely as not" opinion from a non-VA endocrinologist. The VA did a C&P and denied, also quoting some article. The denial was based on the fact that the non-VA doc did not perform specific tests required to confirm the condition. I checked and they were correct. The VA repeated the tests and they were negative, so I accepted the decision. Another one of my claims was for "heart disabilities" including heart attack and included a "more likely than not" nexus opinion from a non-VA neuro doc involving a heart attack. Yeah, it's a bit weird to have a neurologist write an opinion for a heart attack claim. In this case, it involved migraine meds that caused the heart attack. The VA C&P nurse practitioner indicated they reviewed my nexus letter and quoted some article. The odd part was they focused their entire opinion around a heart rhythm disorder that was denied years ago and completely ignored opining for or against my nexus letter. The VARO sided with the NP and said the decision was more persuasive because my doc did not review my service records). I requested HLR review and won. They found my doc's nexus was very thorough, met all VA requirements for secondary SC, and was granted under relative equipoise/benefit of the doubt. I am not sure if those examples help, but they show it the errors can be made by our own nexus docs or even the VA.
  12. Good info from @pacmanx1 There is a forum here dedicated to CUE. Here's a good example of a CUE I recently won a CUE for a decision that became final about 20 years ago. The similar approach might work for you depending on the error the VA may have made. Mine was pretty cut and dry. I won 30% SC for a disability due to aggravation, but the VA reduced that by 10% to 20% based solely on the C&P examiner stating I had the disability prior to service. I looked up the laws and regs that were in effect at the time the decision was made. I found the reg in effect at the time that described the proper procedure for reducing ratings granted due to aggravation. They would first determine the level of disability at the time of the decision and then determine the pre-service level of disability in terms of the rating schedule and then deduct it. I checked the rating criteria in effect at the time of the decision and found that "because they had it prior to service" was not mentioned. The criteria was very specific. I explained all that and explained the benefit gained if not for the error. The VA verified it and then corrected the error. My initial combined rating went up from 40% to 50%. I got retro including refund of VA copays.
  13. It never hurts to reference a BVA decision or explain legal errors with a supplemental. Just be sure that you do your homework and any laws, regs, or court precedents involving the error were in effect at the time of your decision. For example, some law from 10 years ago might no longer be in effect if your denial was recent. I filed two CUEs a while back, but the VA asked me to submit it as a supplemental. I was surprised that one was granted as a supplemental, but the other was denied (and I appealed it as HLR and then later BVA). The CUE I won at supplemental was for a decision that became final 20 years ago. The VARO failed to follow what the regulations required at that time regarding reducing a rating percentage for disabilities SC due to aggravation. I explained the error in the decision, what the C&P examiner said, what the rating criteria were, what the VARO determined, and most importantly what 38 CFR required. I also explained that if not for the error, I would have been granted a higher percentage. They failed to follow the regulation and just reduced my rating my 10% because I had it before service. All the did o was verify what I provided, conceded the error, and corrected it. Keep in mind that benefit of the doubt or judgement calls were not a part of it.
  14. Good info! I was surprised M21-1 had an article dedicated to Equitable Relief: M21-1, Part III, Subpart vi, Chapter 1, Section B - Equitable Relief and Other Requests Article ID: 554400000014282 https://www.knowva.ebenefits.va.gov/system/templates/selfservice/va_ssnew/help/customer/locale/en-US/portal/554400000001018/content/554400000014282/M21-1,-Part-III,-Subpart-vi,-Chapter-1,-Section-B---Equitable-Relief-and-Other-Requests#:~:text=38 U.S.C.,38 U.S.C. This first paragraph reminded why Hadit.com exists: While reading the M21-1 article, it felt like CUE for some situations. For the second point, the article included an example where the VA determined SC was granted in error and wanted to recoup the payments. The veteran requested equitable relief.
  • Create New...

Important Information

{terms] and Guidelines