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

theo

Seaman
  • Posts

    29
  • Joined

  • Last visited

About theo

Contact Methods

  • Website URL
    http://
  • ICQ
    0

Previous Fields

  • Service Connected Disability
    60

theo's Achievements

  1. Berta, you're getting snippets, however the overall picture is amazing. The things the VA does is quite interesting. Never give UP!!! Theo
  2. Hi Berta, I wanted to bring you up to date with my claim. July is when I received my Award letter and got rated 100% with the TDIU added to the 70%. I received back pay from Nov 07 to July 08. This was the grant for TDIU that the AMC gave me. As I mentioned before, I filed for the TDIU in 2000, that was denied in 2002 by the BVA along with the 1151. File to the Court of Appeals, which kick it back to BVA in 2003. During the course of 4-5 years, the 1151 and TDIU were separated so one would not hold the other up. This was an appeal court decision. The ANC was the one that granted the TDIU, which only went back let than a year for retro. I went to the VA field office on Aug 06 08 and filed a 21-4138 requesting: "Review claim for IU and for possible effective date reconsideration. Unemployability was denied in 2002, and just recently granted 08" Attached a copy of rating! I've had to call the VA asking if the 21-4138 was filed, I had a phone contact with Pheonix, who called for an audit. I recently called and another VA contact person said they were putting in another request which the VA is suppose to contact me within 5 days and explain to me what was the reason for not going back to the 2000 or 2002 date. No response. According to the Reason for Decision for is pretty much that I got the 30% for something that was rated 0% in 2002 and according to the last 2007 of 5 Comp & Pen exams over a 5 yr period is what the rater is using as a baseline for not going back to the filing date. In January the BVA denied the 1151. I've appealed. That's my update Thank you for being there Theo
  3. You dont have an award letter yet you stated : That is correct "The allergic rhinitis is increased to 30% effective November 2007, Yes from the last of 3 C&P the Entitlement to Individual Unemployability is granted effective November 2007." Yes, the 30% qualifies me for IU. I originally applied for TDIU in 2000. I understand this was the negotiation between the DAV and VA. Also the TDIU is permanent and if I file any further action could effect the permanent status. Sounds like a treat, indicating to me that if I appeal the 1151 again which is said to have been denied could cause consequences. I also found out that I was denied service connection on a second file for HB, Dia, hearing loss due, exposure to radiation and other items. I was not told this until yesterday! The VA said to me that my rep should come look a the file and tell me whats happening. I complained and was told of the denial and did I receive a letter dated in June. NO!!!! I guess for some of us who are over 60, the treat is real. "Where did that info come from Theo?" The DAV had to sign off on it, since they are my Representatives. "DAV correspondence"-from past post regarding a post decision effective May 2008 When did you get this DAV letter ? June Have you sent in an Iris inqury? Don't know what Iris Inquiry is! The DAV based this info on something-and I find it odd that you would even hear from the DAV about a grant of benefits-before getting an award letter from the VA-still- it might make sense but where is the money? and the decision? I understand a letter was sent to me in June by someone at the VA level that I did not get that stating a decision has been decided and due to a back log, a letter should be forth coming 3 - 4 months. However I did not receive the letter that was read to me by a DAV rep. You cant really appeal it if you dont have the decision. As far as the VA records reflect, still 60% Thanks for your response Berta
  4. "Question: The TDIU was filed in 2000, received by the VA in 2001, this required a 8940 form, correct. Why does the DAV keep asking me if I filed the form 8940 for TDIU?" That's a good question. If I was denied in 2000 TDIU it would be apparent I filed a form 8940. Maybe they lost their copy-do you still have your copy of the 8940? They don't keep copies, the DAV that is. Boy -I thought Buffalo RO was a mess- this is just ridiculous what you are going through- what RO is this? Washington, and LA It looks to me like they ignored your IMOs from Dr. Bash- my VARO has done this to me since 2004. What they did was mix up the 1151 with the TDIU and already service connected issue in order to deny the 1151. I did get an edditional 30% combined with 60% that get me to 70%. I did get the TDIU but only dated back to the last C&P. 9 months. I understand that they made the rating permanent at 100% pay, this is predicated on not filing anymore claims with the VA. the DAv Rep said that I might get a new rater out of college and see things different than the last rater. What a County I suggest you might do what I did- I got so fed up I sent my IMOs from Dr. Bash-I have two now-got the second one almost 2 years ago-and sent it to Dep Sec Mansfield -VA-in DC Send the Deputy Secretary Mansfield a cover letter stating you have no recourse but to ask him to submit your IMos from Dr. Bash because they have consistently ignored 3 of them from you. (Mansfield had to apologize to Dr Bash for something- look story some VA screw up a few years ago so he certainly does know who Dr. Bash is-when I did this I got a letter from the VSM at Buffalo confirming that the IMos went into my file with the letter from Mansfield's office-now they cannot say again that they didnt get them) maybe- It is bad enough they say we need competent medical evidence and we have to spend so much money to get these IMOs - and worse yet when the VA wont even consider them. Deputy Secretary Gordon Mansfield April 25, 2008 Department of Veterans Affairs 810 Vermont Avenue,NW Washington, D. C. 20420 I was told that the VA does not care if a Senator, Congress person gets involved, they are going to do whatever. If you do get them involved, you are punished by slow walking the file. Can Mansfield make a difference? FYI: My file was rated in May, send to Post D, no awards letter no increase as of today. Blessing to the Family
  5. You dont have an award letter yet you state : No "The allergic rhinitis is increased to 30% effective November 2007, the Entitlement to Individual Unemployability is granted effective November 2007." Where did that info come from Theo? DAV correspondence Have you received any retro money yet? NO Question: The TDIU was filed in 2000, received by the VA in 2001, this required a 8940 form, correct. Why does the DAV keep asking me if I filed the form 8940 for TDIU? Common sense would tell you the form was submitted if I was denied to TDIU. "I've been advised by the DAV to take the additional percentage, afterwards file for a different effective date for the TDIU" I agree with that- what concerns me is this: "I have not received any award letter" I'm waiting on the letter!-- I've filed hardship, however they say that there is awaiting list for expedited cases. I've been on an expedite for 4 years in the development process, rating, and now the post determination Also it seemed to me the the remand regarded the issues of the Section 1151 claim was not in the BVAs jurisdiction-nor the AMc's jurisdiction - Section 1151 claims need bonafide medical proof of negligence or malpractice- I forget how your specific 1151 claim went. You can appeal their denial of the Section 1151. It will be the 3rd or 4th time I've appealed a denial to the VA after the 1151 and TDIU was remanded by the court of appeals. Dr. Bash wrote three opinion's regarding this issue regarding the 1151. What's happening is that they are mixing the 1151 and the TDIU together instead of rating the issues separately. My file has been to nearly every tiger team from st. Pete, Washington, virginia, and back. So many RO -VARO's and three or four C&P exams. Its like the insurance industry, Slow Walking the file! And you certainly can NOD the effective dates-when you get an award letter that you can NOD. NOD is Notice of Determination? Also Berta, I have another 2007 file that has been rated. This was as file that my primary Doctor asked me to submit for high blood, diabetes, agent orange, exposure to radiation as a missile tech, scar from surgery, and other items. I understand that it has been rated and sent to my washington where my file is being determined post. Then this will be processed. I don't know what this file has in it. I have not received a SSOC, but told the file was rated and also going to Post D. Thank you for responding.. I'll keep on top list reply.
  6. It took me awhile to find your response. I wrote this this morning which may repeat myself.. Hadit has changed considerably in its user interface.. Need some feedback! Just recently in April 2008, VA grant me an additional 30% for a Allergic Rhinitis service connected condition previously rated of 0% in 2002 filed for in 2000. At that time I was granted 60% for inactive tuberculosis and restrictive abnormality and asthma. I was denied 1151 and TDIU which I appealed TDIU and 1151, it was remanded back to the BVA. I've posted my case in Hadit before. The TDIU and the 1151 is a court remand dating back to court docket 2004. The allergic rhinitis is increased to 30% effective November 2007, the Entitlement to Individual Unemployability is granted effective November 2007. The VA is trying to negate my letter from my VA doctors who state in two separate letter in 2007 and 2008 that "The veteran is unable to have a job that requires physical exertion due to his asthma, or any sedentary labor that make it difficult for him to use his medication including inhalers and nebulizer machine." However the rater choose to not address the issue and give me TDIU with the combined 70% instead of going back to the initial request for TDIU dating back to 2000 when I filed for it. The obstructive abnormality was noted in 1996. I've been advised by the DAV to take the additional percentage, afterwards file for a different effective date for the TDIU. The 1151 was denied. "Service-connective for degenerative disc disease of spine with sciatica secondary to steroid treatment for service-connected disability of emphysema with inactive pulmonary tuberculosis and restrictive abnormality and asthma is denied" What the have done is overlap the 1151 and the TDIU which confuses the issue. I have not received any award letter. I hope I can find the response faster.. ------------------------------some answers------------------ I'm now reading your response from June... Berta wrote:when was the formal TDIU form 21-8940 filed? Also-do you get SSA disability too- for the same SC conditions? No, I don't have enough SSA credit. Haven't worked since 1995. A lot depends on what the actual award letter states- Which award letter? 2002, or the one that is coming? The initial claim for TDIU was filed in 2000, the the decision was made in January 2001 to grant the 60% for Asthma, and deny the TDIU and the 1151. The Introduction says: " The Vet filed a new claim for total evaluation to the individual employablity benefit that was received on January 2001, He also submitted a claim for compensation due to additional disability of hernia from VA Kidney surgery under provision 38 USC 1151. Decision: 1. Evaluation for emphysema with inactive pulmonary tuberculosis and restrictive abnormality and asthma, which is current 10 percent disabling, is incresed to 60 percent effect January 2000. 2. Evaluation of allergic rhinitis, which is currently 0 percent disabling, is continued. I will spare you the rest.. Theo
  7. Berta, theo here again after 2 yrs since our last communication. I've been patiently walking my post. I recently got a verbal from the DAV in washington that the VA will grant the IU regarding my claim, plus 30% for Rhinitis. Someone finally wrote the right letter regarding my service connected disability as it relates to my inability to work, to include sedentary work. My initial claim was filed in 2000, denied 1151, and TDIU, granted 60% from 10%. Appealed 1151 and TDIU. The issue was remanded by the court of appeals in 2003 to the BVA. The DAV argued the case before the court. I understand from speaking with the DAV, the 1151 will be denied, the IU granted, however the rep said the retro pay for the IU will not go back to the date of the claim. The DAV Rep said it may go back a year. In my records, I noticed that the Issue stated on the Docket No: 1. Entitlement to compensation under U.S.C.A. § 1151 (West 2002) for an incisional hernia based upon VA treatment in October 1994. 2. Entitlement to total disability evaluation base on individual unemployability. In a Transmittal of Decision of Board of Veterans' Appeals, a paragraph stated: "Further, the veteran's representative argued in a March 2003 statement that the veteran's lung condition was of such severity, depth and pesistence to warrant a total evaluation based on individual unemployability in and of itself. The record show that the veteran's service-connective emphysema with inactive pulmonary tuberculosis and restrictive abnormality and asthma." The restrictive abnormality was noted in 1996, however due to the incisional hernia, I've only be able to do spirometer. Over the years the incisional hernia and other issue was clouding the ability to work issue with other issues other than the service connected disability. Finally a doctor at the VA wrote the correct letter that acknowledged the statement quoted above. dated 2008 "The Veteran is unable to have a job that requires physical exertion due to his asthema, or any sedentary labor that would make it difficult for him to use his medications including his inhalers and nebulizer machine." I had a similar letter last year from the same Department with different language but really says the same: dated 2007 "The Veteran is unable to be employed in any joy that requires physical exertion due to his breathing limitations. In addition he is unable to do sedentary labor that would take him away from is medications, inhalers and nebulizer machine." FYI: The initial claim or increase, TDIU, and 1151, the effective date for the increase from 10% to 60%, denial for TDIU, 1151 is Feb 1, 2000. The DAV rep said for me to get the IU in place and then appeal the effective date of the retro pay. Is that wise? If I repeated myself, please excuse. I was trying to send an email directly but did not work,so I posted the not in the forum. Then I decided to send a reply to this email. Thanks Berta! Theo
  8. Berta, theo here again after a year or so since our last communication. I've been patiently walking my post. I recently got a verbal from the DAV in Washington that the VA will grant the IU regarding my claim, plus 30% for Rhinitis. Someone finally wrote the right letter regarding my service connected disability as it relates to my inability to work, to include sedentary work. My initial claim was filed in 2000, denied 1151, and TDIU, granted 60% from 10%. Appealed 1151 and TDIU. The issue was remanded by the court of appeals in 2003 to the BVA. The DAV argued the case before the court. I understand from speaking with the DAV, the 1151 will be denied, the IU granted, however the rep said the retro pay for the IU will not go back to the date of the claim. The DAV Rep said it may go back a year. In my records, I noticed that the Issue stated on the Docket No: 1. Entitlement to compensation under U.S.C.A. § 1151 (West 2002) for an incisional hernia based upon VA treatment in October 1994. 2. Entitlement to total disability evaluation base on individual unemployability. In a Transmittal of Decision of Board of Veterans' Appeals, a paragraph stated: "Further, the veteran's representative argued in a March 2003 statement that the veteran's lung condition was of such severity, depth and pesistence to warrant a total evaluation based on individual unemployability in and of itself. The record show that the veteran's service-connective emphysema with inactive pulmonary tuberculosis and restrictive abnormality and asthma." The restrictive abnormality was noted in 1996, however due to the incisional hernia, I've only be able to do spirometer. Over the years the incisional hernia and other issue was clouding the ability to work issue with other issues other than the service connected disability. Finally a doctor at the VA wrote the correct letter that acknowledged the statement quoted above. dated 2008 "The Veteran is unable to have a job that requires physical exertion due to his asthema, or any sedentary labor that would make it difficult for him to use his medications including his inhalers and nebulizer machine." I had a similar letter last year from the same Department with different language but really says the same: dated 2007 "The Veteran is unable to be employed in any joy that requires physical exertion due to his breathing limitations. In addition he is unable to do sedentary labor that would take him away from is medications, inhalers and nebulizer machine." FYI: The initial claim or increase, TDIU, and 1151, the effective date for the increase from 10% to 60%, denial for TDIU, 1151 is Feb 1, 2000. The DAV rep said for me to get the IU in place and then appeal the effective date of the retro pay. Is that wise? If I repeated myself, please excuse. Thanks Berta! Theo
  9. Berta: "Has the VA considered his opinion at all yet?" Yes the C&P Examiner quotes Dr. Bash in detail regarding his IMO, also my primary care Dr. is quoted as well, as he wrote: The Veteran has been followed at the VA medical Center for a number of years for the following problems: Asthma, Lumbar Radiculopathym Depression, Chronic Rhinitis ad history of kidney removal for Cancer. In addition to the above problems, he is service connected for Pulmonary TB, Major Depressive Disorder, Disgestive Disorder, Hearing loss and Hypertension. He has been under my care for this period of time and has followed all arecommendations and precedures as prescribed. He takes his medications as orderred. These medical conditions has caused him to be unemployable. The doctors statement added in some items in the S-C that are not S-C. However, when he wrote the letter he advised me to go to the federal building and re file the TDIU since they lumped the 1151 and the TDIU together. I filed a separate TDIU. Theo
  10. Berta, I went to the BVA's website and put in Docket NO and other info and nothing came back. It could be that I'm not inputting the correct information. The remand was sent to AMC in September with the instructions. Its funny how the 1151 2005 C&P last year was separate from this years 2006 TDIU C&P when the remand was for incomplete but they did not reexamine me for 1151 just Unemployability. The two issues was separate issue, however the BVA or AMC lumped both apeals together to make one decision. I feel its going to end up back at the Court of Appeals. The BVA remanded this back to the AMC after they denied me, this prior to the Court of Appeals remanding it back to the BVA in 2004 for the 1151 and the TDIU. The BVA appeal was initiated back in 2002, so this has been going on for a while now. I went through the Voc Rehab Evaluation for only 6 days. Dale Jr. 8 wrote this: "The whole key to this is your non-service connected issues. If those are the primary reasons that the Voc Rehab people said what they did you have an uphill climb." The rehab report is full of pain issue pertaining to the hernia pain. My concern is how high is the uphill climb. Back then I was taking morphine sulfate, now that was a trip in itself. Trying to concentrate during testing... my God. Breathing is an issue when you are taking certain meds. Anyway thanks for the reply.. if you can tell me how to access the BVA online I'll access and share with you. Thank for Dr. Bash... He great. Theo
  11. Berta.. I recently had my C&P examination in December 06 just before Christmas. Type : Respiratory (obstructive, Restrictive and Interstitial) Pulmonary Tubersulosis and Mycobacterial Diseases Compensation and pension examination Instructions from the AMC to the examiner: "In particular, the examiner should discuss the manifestations of associated with the veteran's service-connected emphysema and allergic rhinitis and, to the extent possible, render an opinion as to the level of impairment caused by these disorders. The examiner is specifically asked to render an opinion as to the effect of the service-connected disabilities on the veteran's ability to procure, and to maintain, gainful employment (in rendering this opinion, the examiner should, to the extent possible, distinguish between the manifestation of the veteran's service-connected emphysema and service-connected allergic rhinitis and the manifestations of any non-service connected respiratory disorders." The examiner's opinion: 1. Inactive tuberculosis 2. Bronchial asthma 3. Allergic rhinitis OPINION: 1. The level of impairment caused by the veteran's allergic rhinitis is mild to moderate. 2. the level of impairment caused by the veteran's bronchial asthma is moderate. The veteran has been engaged in vocational rehabilitation in computer work. If he Veteran is able to be trained and to perform this work, he should be able to do this kind of work without too much interference due to the above service-connected conditions. "While it should be granted that the allergic rhinitis and bronchial asthma are somewhat disabling, they should not severely impair the ability of the veteran to perform sedentary work. That being said, should the veteran be obliged to do a lot of talking on his job, he might find it more difficult to main employment due to shortness of breath, and chronic allergic rhinitis. If there is a primary reason that the veteran would have great difficulty in obtaining and maintaining gainful employment, it is secondary to the nonservice-connected problems, such as chronic back pain, depression, and left flank pain secondary to incisional hernia." The examiner's opinion regarding his C&P statement stated: "The veteran has been engaged in vocational rehabilitation in computer work. If the veteran is able to be trained and to perform this work, he should be able to do this kind of work without too much interference due to the above service-connected conditions." My concern about this statement in that the examiner did not read the file / Vocational Rehabilitation Report. Which stated that the veteran was placed in the Independent Living Program, a computer was purchased from him communicate with family. And the report has stated that the veteran is unable to vocational rehabilitation. REHABILATION CLOSURE STATEMENT. I won't go into specific information. "The Veteran completed an initial orientation and intial vocational interview on date indicated. The Veteran has a services connected disability combined rating of 60% for Pulmonary issue and other zero percent issue that are service connected. The veteran has an imparment to employability. He has not worked for the past five years, he is 60 years old and hs multiple medical problems with regards to his pulmonary condition. Furtermore, he has difficulties in terms of depression and is being treadted for this condition. Moveover, the Veteran has not overcome the effects of impairments to employability. The veteran was determined to have an employment handicap. Conditions for a serious employment handicap were also identified. The vertan is being treated for multiple condition and taking several medications. His Dr.indicated that the veteran was entitled to the Chapter 31 vocational rehabilitation benefits. However, he determined that the veteran was not feasible for competitive employment and would benefit from and Independent Living Plan."The Independent was written and since... I went through, now I have the file. The document is closes with comments of case managers closing statement." Question, is the C&P examiner trumping the VOC Rehab people with his what if statement about being trained on computers and sedentary work? And do doctors statement's really matter anymore? All of the Doctors letters included in the file and some referenced in the C&P I'm trying to get a read on this comp and pen... Your opinion please Theo
  12. I was referred to Dr. Bash by Berta.. I was successful in reaching him and since the few weeks I've work with him by providing him with access to my records, file I have Dr. Bash was able to give me a IME that is currently in my file at the AMC. I highly recommend Dr. Bash, and for you Veterans who need more infomation about him, here is a link to a pdf file that will help you get the proper information and how to get in touch with him... http://www.kingculture.com/Veterans_Medical_Advisor_Bash.pdf Thanks Theo
  13. Berta, regarding doctor's letters, In my file are a couple of doctors letters that speak to my non-service connected claim and one that speaks to the aggravation to the service connection caused by the hernia. The doctor who is a VA Neurologist. The Nueurologist states: "The Vet has been a patient under may care in the neurology clinic for pain syndrome associated with degenerative disk disease in the lumbosacral spine, sciatica, and chronic left L5 radiculopathy. In addition to this condition he is suffering pain from an incisional hernia as a complication from a left nephrectomy operation. It is my determination that the patient's disability form these condition is permanent and stationary, and the pain from these two condition is sufficiently severe enough to make him unemployable." The other doctor is a Pulmonary specialist. His letter speaks to my service connection: emphysema with inactive pulmonary tuberculosis and restrictive abnormality and asthma rated 60%, also allergic rhinitis at 0%. The Board of Beterans Appeals states in their remand to the AMC: "Thereafter, the veteran should be accorded a VA pulmonary examination for the purpose of ascertaining the severity of his service-connected emphysema with inactive pulmonary tuberculosis, restrictive abnormality, and asthma and his service connected allergic rhinitis as well as the effect of these disabilities on his ability to procure, and maintain, gainful employment. The claim folder must be reviewed by the examiner prior to the examinations. Any medical indicated tests, to include pulmonary function test, should be accomplished. In particular, the examiner should discuss the manifestations associated with the veterans's service-connected emphysema and allergic rhinitis and, to the extent possible, render an opin as to the level of impairment caused by these disorders. The examiner is specifically asked to render an opinion as to the effect of these service-connected disabilities on the veteran's ability to procure, and to maintain, gainful employment. (In rendering this opinion, the examiner should, to the extent possible, distinguish between the manifestation of the veteran's service-connected emphysema and services-connected allergic rhinitis and the manifestation of any nonservice-connected respiratory disorders." The Pulmonary Doctor/Specialist Pulmonary wrote an opinion that is in my file since 2004, that states: To Whom it may concerns: This letter is written to certify that the veteran is unable to perform the breathing maneuvers required during pulmonary function testing. Forced exhalation causes severe pain related to a large abdominal incisional hernia and he is unable to perform the test adequately." Does this hurt me? or does this fall under the 50/50 rule, and does it There were 4 items the BVA instructed the AMC to accomplish: 1. Notify the Veteran by letter. 2. Secure the Vocational Rehabilation Folder, which I sent them the complete file. 3. The Statement in bold regarding the Pulmonary examination. 4. A re-adjudicate the issue of entitlement and return to BVA. In February of this year I responded to the AMC regarding the issue of hernia; AMC February 2006: However, the issue of entitlement to compensation under the cited Law, rest not on the simple fact of a causative relationship. Entitle to compensation requires that the additional disability not be the result of willful misconduct, that the disability was caused by the VA treatment and that the proximate cause of the disability was carelessness, negligence, lack of proper skill, error in judgment or similar instance of fault on the part of the VA medical center; or that the proximate cause of the disability was an event not reasonably foreseeable. We agree, the surgery caused the incisional hernia. Theo ANSWER February 2006: In a letter dated May 24, 2004, the Pulmonary Specialist describes exhalation breathing maneuvers aggravated by the Incisional Hernia. This not only represents a causative relationship, it supports without a reasonable doubt an aggravation of the Service Connection. Pursuant to 38 U.S.C.A. § 1110 and 38 C.F.R. § 3.310 Regarding the Incisional Hernia, this was included. Don't know if it was effective, I was trying to make my case. AMC 2006: The claim for compensation for an incisional hernia as residual of partial nephrectomy under 38 USC 1151 is considered. Compensation is payable for any disability which results from VA hospitalization, medical or surgical treatment, or vocational rehabilitation, or as the result of having submitted to a VA medical examination. However, entitlement to compensation for an incisional hernia as a residual of partial nephrectomy is denied as it is considered to be a necessary consequence or expected result of the abdominal or flank surgery. Theo ANSWER: Also, 38 U.S.C. § 101(16) only requires a disability and a temporal relationship between that disability and active service. The definition does not mention any requirement for a diagnosis of an underlying malady or condition. Court decisions have held that "'disability’ as used in § 1110 refers to impairment of earning capacity, and that such definition mandates that any additional impairment of earning capacity resulting from an already service-connected condition, regardless of whether or not the additional impairment is itself a separate disease or injury caused by the service-connected condition, shall be compensated." Allen v. Brown, 7 Vet. App. 439, 448 I need to know if what I'm doing is making sense to someone other than me. With much Respect to the Hadit Group Theo
×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

Guidelines and Terms of Use