Jump to content
VA Disability Community via Hadit.com

VA Disability Claims Articles

Ask Your VA Claims Question | Current Forum Posts Search | Rules | View All Forums
VA Disability Articles | Chats and Other Events | Donate | Blogs | New Users

Sandra Williams

Second Class Petty Officers
  • Posts

    68
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Everything posted by Sandra Williams

  1. I understand. Still awaiting for pay but it is not too far away like it was 7 years ago. But I did have the same thoughts that you have expressed. I make sure I take my cymbalta to make it all go away.
  2. You are all right. I am to blessed too be stressed now. Merry Christmas and many more awards to come for you all. Thanks for your continued support throughout these 7 years. I can truly say that without this site and others like it I would not have had the knowledge, facts, or weapons to fight this battle as hard as I did. I believe that resilience and staying focus on the end goes a long way too.
  3. Just received Brown envelop today awarded sc for death and DIC back to 2003. The claim was on appeal and is now being returned to the WS RO for disposition. Does anyone have an idea how long this process will take? The lady said that because of the amount of the award it would take several signatures to authorize. The claim has not been sent back yet. Does the 10-40 days apply to my case?
  4. SMC I was just wondering if my husband filed to add his heart condition in 2002 and also filed for SMC how would that affect any retro pay. At the time he filed he was gravely ill. He was rated 100% SC PTSD and he then filed his heart condition along with SMC in 2002. Scenario: Had he been granted SC for his heart and for the sake of argument he was rated 60% for the condition how would the SMC benefits be applied under Bradley vs Peake (do not know if this is cited correctly). Would they go back to the original denial apply his benefits for SC IHD and apply the SMC for the period from January 2002 to his death November 2003. And then would the DIC benefits pick up from my filing date of December 2003 when approved.
  5. I hearing good new for the veterans but I have not heard any responses from widows or widowers. Do you think that the veteran claims will be processed first (which would be ok with me). Also I did not receive any info about my claim being nehmer but the American Legion said it was but nothing official. I called yesterday they said my claim is still on stay. Anyone else been notified of their claims still in stay. Also my claim is at the BVA. Will they handle that claim any differently that other claims.
  6. someone please tell me how you got access to your files or claims. also are you a veteran or spouse of deceased veteran. I have called everywhere trying to get access to my appeals claim and I can not find anyone who can help. I received my authencity in July and got logged in but nothing after that.
  7. I have level 2 or Premium Account Status. I am the widow of veteran does that make a difference
  8. Can some tell me how are you seeing the status of your claims on e-benefits. I have had access since July but still do not see anything regarding my claims. Can someone help me.
  9. Could you clarify. The last correspondence I recieved from VA had a refer to number of 014DS333. Do you know what this number is in reference to?
  10. I just finished listening to Ken Carpenter and he states that in 1956 there was a statue put into law that if a claim was made for SS than the system was to automatically generate a claim for VA. But of course some one by the name van balkenburg had to go to court to get the ball rolling. From what I understand the Court directed the va to correct this mistake. I am not sure if I am wording this right. But in my instance when my husband passed away I began to recieve his SS death benefits along with my son. At the time I was unemployed and qualified. From what I understand that this is more than evidence to generate a DIC back to the date that I started receiving death benefits from SS. Has anyone else heard of this or listened to the training that Ken conducted on DIC back in Feb 2010?
  11. I too was told that a letter was mailed on August 17, 2010 stating my claim in on "stay" status. It was at the BVA and almost assigned to the judge. I am fighting for direct connection but I take the presumption only if it goes back to EED of December 2003 which is the date I originally filed my claim for sc death due to secondary IHD and PTSD. My husband passed away in November 2003. I am so tired of this. But I am hanging in there because I know the victory is mine.
  12. I want to ask if on ebenefits if your claim has not been assigned to a judge does it not show a status. I have checking for the last week but it still shows not activity.
  13. I read this document and I can't tell what the Sec's response really is. Are they going to publish the new regs or not.
  14. I went to the RO today so that I can get access to Ebenefits. They said I should receive a letter with my signon and password in 5-13 days. I hope I get it in less time. I am anxious to see what they have on file. I tried my myhealthvet login and password and of course they do not work. I actually had a good experience with the reps today even was informed to apply for a position. I explained how I had mainly developed my case over the past 4 yrs and have only had assistance from VSO for about 2 years and discussed some issues with them and one of them ask if I had considered applying for a job.
  15. Hi Berta Yes my husband was a Vietnam Veteran. He was receiving 100% disability for PTSD. In 2002 he applied for his heart to be added to his disability claim but was denied. He died in 2003. His death certificate states myocardial infarction with CAD as secondary condition. I have what I believe to be a strong IMO. I do not believe that his SSA benefits were taken into account. I tried to get the records prior to submitting my disagreement to the rececent SSCO but they wanted to charge me 200 dollars at the least. I reported this to my VSO he stated that if it came down to it we would have the VA request the files. Larry suggested that I request the files under the FOIA which I have not done yet. I did request that entitlement of service connection for cause of the veteran’s death CAD/CHD/IHD secondary to service connection for PTSD, AO exposure on the response to the SSOC. I did ask if I could make a correction to my response to say his PTSD was aggravating or excerbating his heart disease but again my VSO said that in his opinion my response was good as any that he has seen and just to hold on. He also states that he will be in Washington on the 29th and he was going to go and see what was going on with my case. He also states that in his opinion he thinks I will win my case. I just don't know anymore. I thought we had enough on the remand to win but he also stated that in many cases the AMC will not reverse the ROs decision thus my case is proceeding back to the BVA. Here is what I submitted back as a response to the SSOC. June 2, 2010 To: Department of Veteran Affairs Appeals Management Center 1722 Eye Street NW Washington DC 20421 From: Sandra Williams (Spouse of Deceased Veteran Jerry Hugh Williams) Re: 397/AMC File #: 29234796 Supplemental Statement of Case (SSOC) dated May 6, 2010 Dear Sir I am in receipt of the Supplemental Statement of Case dated May 6, 2010 which I received by fax from AMC-Congressional Unit on Friday May 28, 2010. By receipt of this notice I am submitting a response to the SSOC and will address specific points in the SSOC. I will also like to note for the record that the American Legion who was provided a copy of the SSOC is not my POA of record. I submitted a POA form in November 2008 along with my response to the 2008 remand. I am requesting that for the record Colonel Donald Belle to be my representative of the Vietnam Veterans organization. Issues to be addressed-Agree with both issues 1. Entitlement of service connection for cause of the veteran’s death CAD/CHD/IHD secondary to service connection for PTSD, AO exposure 2. Entitlement to Dependency and Indemnity Compensation (DIC) under 38 USCA 1318. Evidence-Disagree 1. Appellant’s statements received March 7, 2007, February 13, 2007, April 25, 2008 2. Lay medical document from Dr. Granada Neil, MD received January 8, 2009 3. Personnel records from Duke Energy received December 15, 2008 4. VA Examination (addendum) conducted by the VAMC Fayetteville, NC on January 5, 2010 Evidence that has been omitted Internet articles submitted March 2005 that contradicts VA medical examiner review in May 2004 that “current thought does not support a connection between the cause of death in the matter and PTSD”. I would like to direct the attention of the Board to recent studies that veterans are at higher risk for coronary artery disease and heart disorders than those without such psychological disorders. The VA examiner does not address where his opinion is derived from. As indicated in Citation Nbr. 1011095 Docket No: 03-15 222A “From what the MD has stated in my case it is not clear whether the examiner conducted his own search of the medical literature, including articles cited in the medical literature submitted by the myself, or was merely making an assessment based solely on the articles in the claims file which does support that PTSD and CAD/Heart Disorder has a direct correlation to each other and the cause of death. In this reference case the Court could not decide what the examiner may mean by the term "objective medical evidence" (in my case current thought). Was the examiner indicating that the appellant's evidence includes peer-reviewed journals and random control tests, but the evidence therein is not considered "objective" according to unspecified criteria? Or was the examiner indicating that none of the appellant's articles are either peer-reviewed or based on random control trials, either or both of which are needed to constitute "objective medical evidence"? The examiner's remarks are entirely too murky to justify the Board's reliance on his report to assess the medical nexus issue raised by the appellant's research articles. See Nieves-Rodriguez v. Peake, 22 Vet.App. 295, 301 (2008) (citing Stefl v. Nicholson, 21 Vet.App. 120, 124 (2007)). My contention is that the VA examiner did not conduct specific investigation to ascertain what the “current thought of the medical community is “now”. As my expert IMO stated in her documentation based on extensive review of the claims file which included SMR, personal medical records, employment records and other statements, she opinioned that “As such, in my medical opinion, I have found there to be a very significant contributing relationship between his mental illness, chemical exposure and resultant cardiovascular condition and ultimate death”. Under no circumstance should the opinion of Dr. Neil be considered “lay”. In addition the employment records submitted by Duke Energy was information requested to support the length of time the veteran had be experience PTSD and its affect on the veteran. Since PTSD is considered a mental health issue and I feel that the company’s lack of referral to a healthcare professional would be outside of the company’s area of expertise since they would not have been in position to make that call. We must also consider the time in which all this was occurring. Most organizations were ill-prepared to deal with an employee experiencing mental health issues such as PTSD. The evidence should consider only what its intent was which is to support that the veteran was experiencing symptoms of PTSD years before his diagnosis. In the matter of Agent Orange Exposure, the VA examiner did opinion that death from heart disease is caused by or a result of Agent Orange exposure. He noted that that if the veteran was exposed to AO then the heart disease is “now” a presumptive diagnosis. Thus if the veteran was exposed to agent orange then his death from myocardial infarction and coronary artery disease would be considered service connected. Reasonable Doubt. I respectfully ask that the BVA look upon the evidence that my IMO has submitted along with all other supporting documents. This doctor is an expert in her field and her reputation in the medical community is impeccable. To suggest that the information that she provided is lay information is a discredit to her and her profession. I also submit that heart attacks as the result of CAD is considered in ischemic heart disease by definition. In conclusion, I do not agree with the findings presented in this SSOC. I believe a finding in favor of should be to grant benefits sought on appeal/remand. I believe that facts speak for themselves and that a reasonable benefit of doubt should be established on behalf of the veteran’s spouse. The evidenced that submitted by my IMO with some degree of agreement from the examiner in part of the ruling should be considered warranting the grant of benefits. My IMO is an expert in her field and her reputation in the medical community is impeccable. To suggest that the information that she provided is lay information is a discredit to her and her profession. Lay information as defined by VA standards is evidence not requiring that the proponent have specialized education, training or experience. Lay evidence is competent if it is provided by a person who knowledge of facts or circumstance and conveys matters that be observed and described by a lay person such as internet article not the opinion of a medical doctor. I also submit that heart attacks as the result of CAD is considered in ischemic heart disease by definition which is the term given to heart problems caused by narrowed heart arteries. When arteries are narrowed, less blood and oxygen reaches the heart muscle. This is also called coronary artery disease and coronary heart disease. This can ultimately lead to heart attack” and should be considered as a presumptive illness which would prove the case of service connection death thus allow the DIC benefits to be paid. (Husband request heart to added to disability associated with PTSD in 2002)
  16. Updating Hadit.com on my claim status. As you know the AMC denied my claim on remand for SC for death and DIC. After I had an interesting conversation with the Congressional Unit I was very discouraged and still remain so. I called today and my case has been sent back to BVA but has not be picked up yet since they only sent it back on the 14th of July. At least it is advancing so I am praying for a favorable decision. Just keep me in your prayers.
  17. Well he is deceased now since 2003 but I have no idea if he was given the information. I will take your suggestion and make an inquiry. Thanks for the input.
  18. Hi I am interesting in finding out about the free $10,000 of insurance if a veteran is rated 100% TDIU PT. I called the VA several months ago and was told that he did not have any insurance. But if it was free and he qualified how would I find out?
  19. Congratulations on your win!!!!!!!!!!!
  20. Congratulations I get so excited when I read of successes like yours and others. It just confirms that I still am in the game and I WILL get receive my just awards.
  21. Thanks Peter53 I really needed to hear this from my friends at Hadit.com. I believe and trust the information that I get from you all.
×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

Guidelines and Terms of Use