Jump to content

Berta

HadIt.com Elder
  • Content Count

    27,315
  • Donations

    $0.00 
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    342

Everything posted by Berta

  1. "It happened again -yesterday I think , maybe Sunday- -- a member , who had already opined , along with me, on the member's issues , in their past posts, gave them advice, that was based on their question in their new thread, without considering their past 17 posts, where they had already got ample advice from this member and me." The member is a widow, Ann Bracey ....I cannot find her post under Effective date. There are 17 other posts, one includes a link to her BVA denial. In those many threads ,I asked if she had filed a NOA at the CAVC- I got no answer.
  2. The downloads are easy to read. I only tried one but am sure they are all accessible here. I regret I that on Friday I left the hadit board. just fora few weeks, or months. For two reasons: Three of the members you want to read your downloads opined on a new member's claim, without even taking the time to read the whole thread, that included a download that was Probative to adequate advice. That has happened before here. It caused a rigamorale over basic VA 101 case law. I dont have time for that. It happened again -yesterday I think , maybe Sunday- -- a member , who had already opined , along with me, on the member's issues , in their past posts, gave them advice, that was based on their question in their new thread, without considering their past 17 posts, where they had already got ample advice from this member and me. So obviously their recent advice was completely inadequate. When we are unwilling to read downloads, DBQs, other evidence the veteran scans here- and their historic threads, to be able to adequately help the claimant- we are no better than the VA.!!!!!!!!! The second reason is that the results of my OAWB complaint is S 221. I will be back here when that situation is resolved This was confrimed yesterday . I posted the link to S 221 here a short time ago but no one was interested enough to read it. The proposed amendment needs to be changed. It is 90% of what 20 years of my evidence igiven to the OAWB involved and what I wanted. The Bill will SAVE LIVES..I am Thrilled!!!!! But I have to get it fixed before it goes to the H VAC. I am working on that as well ,as a different amendment,based on my OAWB investigation results. And oddly enough yesterday I got closer ( via numerous contacts with the VA) to getting my 4 CUEs resolved. another result stemming from my OAWB evidence. So I will not be back here until I get the S221 amendment changed, and I also am also seeking any lawyer who will consider a Class Action for vets that I have mentioned before here....regarding the lousy C & P exams, that MANY of us have received, that are geared solely to deny what can often be, full viable claims with probative evidence. I am sure , some of the members you seek help from in this thread, will be more than happy to read the downloads. Some wont And probably they wont need to read them all...but I do not know and cannot recall exactly what your issue is boiling down to with VA and I do not have the time to read the entire thread and all downloads. Others will help. (If it regards a denial) I dont know if you attached the actual denial and the evidence list. that might be almost all they need to see, and then read any downloaded doc that is probative to the actual denial.
  3. Alex -you are saying the law firm of Hill and Ponton, and other vet lawyers are wrong. But you are wrong. "Recently, the VA has really begun to heavily advocate the use of Disability Benefits Questionnaires (DBQs) by the C&P examiners. The VA has said that the DBQs were created to help streamline the VA claims process, and to help complete the record if they determine that the record as a whole is incomplete or insufficient to decide a claim. According to the VA, there are more than 70 DBQs, covering the overwhelming majority of conditions for which a veteran can receive disability compensation, including PTSD (Note: The DBQ for service connection for PTSD is not available to the public, but you can view the Review PTSD DBQ here in order to get a general idea of what a DBQ entails)." https://www.hillandponton.com/part3-compensation-and-pension-exams-for-ptsd/ This veteran has a valid DBQ written from a contractor that complies with what VA wants. When they receive the CUE I posted for him-which he can tweek if needed, they will make a decision, sooner than later , for all CUEs I filed in the appellate period. My last Denial was awarded in 3 weeks under the CUE I wrote and mailed the next day after the ridiculous denial came. the other most recent ones- once they got to the Nehmer VARO, were awarded in mere weeks as well. After I try to find a little more info on Sgt E 5 's bilater patella syndrome- noted on the C & P exam by the LHI contractor, I wioll post it here. Then I will take time off hadit to work on other issues-I have 4 CUEs pending , due to a OGC pres op and never got any support here on that issue. No one even read the OGC Pres Op to opine on it. The other issues I have are S 221, the Bill going to the H VAC has two major deficiencies in it that the Senators can correct-.before this becomes an amendent. The other issues is the startling fact that the GAO has deemed MANY C & P exams as faulty- and even NVLSP was surprised at their report- The many posthumous exams done on my husband are not only bizarre but medical unfounded. I had to call the WH Hot line because they (VA)are refusing to give me one of them-the most recent one- that was the CUE they awarded in 3 weeks because they had the only evidence I needed- an opinion from VA's top Cardiologist, yet denied on a medical review by someone with in my opinion, no medical background at all. Veterans are losing their rights under 1151 and FTCA----I already explained how here months ago-and losing their rights under 38 USC/CFR whenever they get a C & P exam that has been prepared with no consideration of their actual evidence, in VA's possession. Someone has to do something about it and I intend to. The S221 has priority with me- then the C & P exam situation, geared to DENY claims, and these will be my sole focus after my last post in this topic. MY CUE issues and evidence from the VA itdself are perfect- but I have learned to expect BS from the VA, and that possibility will also take up my time. My last post here post here will be hopefully- some research can help with, as the Bilateral issue might well have caused the ankle issue in this veteran.(Sgt E 5) I do not have the time to be here and argue about established tenets of VA case law, and policy -that can change by the day, as the Hill and Ponton article shows, changes that ALL advocates must be fully aware of . Please dont think I died- everyone- I am in exceptionally good health- I just wont be here until I complete those two important issues above.I have been fighting the NPDB issue for over 20 years-it is finally being addressed by the Senate, but the Bill is deficient because they don't know what I know about the deep state of the VA, and I have so much evidence on that, it will take me time to decide what to send to them. Most of you are losing any future FTCA/1151 rights if the VA harms you or causes your death if your VA doctor is not a VA doctor at all, but employed through QTC, VES, or LHI. And most of you will probably get denied right off the bat if you get a negative C & P exam, in spite of probative evidence you have, if they choose to ignore it. You can CUE them right away or get a costly IMO/IME to appeal the decision and get onto the VA HAmster wheel- but the truth is no one here with a valid claim supported ny medical evidence, should ever even have to take either one those steps.
  4. Before I forget- this article from Hill and Ponton ( Matt Hill is a member here and they are superb veteran lawyers) https://www.hillandponton.com/knee-disabilities/ details how they should rate knee disabilities, to make sure they rate them correctly. And this other article from their site mentiions pain- if you have pain from this condition, you should claim it- the article refers to the Saunders decision. https://www.hillandponton.com/pain-and-disability/ The regulations for ratable pain had not been determined yet but it pays to claim pain if you have it -from the Bilateral Patella syndrome. Ms. Saunders had the same condition you have, while in the military. Her Federal Circuit decision overruled the CAVC denial. Saunders V Wilkie is available here at hadit. It made BIG news-but we have no regulations yet but still "pain" should be claimed, for any disability caused by service.
  5. I apologise to the new member here, Sgt E5, and to all those out there who have read this 6 page long thread because members here are opining on this claim without even taking the time to read the Evidence List or the download of the actual C & Ps, I believe they are on page 4 ..... I think it says they are not' exams' but they in fact are considered C & P 'exams' for VA claims purposes...done by LHI. It says only 4 downloads- and I read it all 4 times and again today so maybe it says 5. So one else here apparently is willing to read your evidence and thus their replies here are ABSURD.( I think 2 of the repliers here are hadit "moderators"- figure that. We -you and I- have been drawn into a negative situation here because no one else would read the downloads , which is the exact reason the VA denies MANY VALID claims. The VA - as MANY OF US know is unwilling to read our evidence- and obviously so are some of the members here- yet they take the time to make comments that are not appropriate to the facts of the case. I will contact Tbird about this. Ebenefits years ago stated I had 53 historic issues with the VA. At least 20 or more of those historic issues involved the fact that the VA completely ignored the most probative evidence I had.I have been successful with every CUE I filed, and that was the only way to get them to rectify their violations of 38 CFR 4.6 and force them ro read my evidence. You and I are being drawn into some odd argument over established VA case law and it is very embarassing to me to know how many members and guests have read this whole thread, which appears to be an effort to breeze over my advice ( I have been a veteran's advocate for over 30 years) and show no interest in the evidence you have and the supporting C & P results from LHI. The denial and evidence list clearly shows they had treatment records etc, yet they ignored those C & P exams, in order to deny. I have an early church obligation and will post whatever I can learn on the patella syndrome, BPS when I get back home-later this afternoon. I think maybe that would be the prime disability you have , as causing the ankle problems as secondary. You certainly have a good valid claim, supporting C & P exams, and your SMRs established the nexus. Unfortunately you are not getting the support you need from others here. They are taking the time to opine, but - like the VA itself-they have not read the entire thread or your downloads. This has happened here before. I am sick and tired of it.
  6. Broncovet =please read the download of the actual Exam. It says 'Her rationale:' meaning the examiner. "Veteran had no issues related to the claimed CONDITION prior to military service. Onset of the condition was during service, documented in the Service Medical Records. There is evidence of current, chronic and continuous treatment and care. A nexus has been established." Per the C & P Exam results posted above in the download------------------- I will try to find more rating info but that is a fairly recent decision. I want to see the regulation , amendment to Title 38 ,or sudden new M21-1MR change or VA Fast Letter etc etc that says if a vet gets a favorable C & P exam, and their nexus is fully established, than, at that point ,they will need an IMO..... (posted here from anyone who has documented legal evidence of this new addition to established VA case law.)
  7. "In a case where there's 2 Dr with different opinions then this is why its always best to use a specialist , if your claim goes into equipoise the specialist usually wins...over just a MD/PA ect,,ect,," There is NO negative medical opinion. This situation is beyond equipoise. Look up :"equipoise". There is only a favorable medical opinion. A VA- requested favorable opinion. There is no negative opinion. Nexus established plus favorable C & P exam equals Award. The VA chose to ignore the C & P exam completely . That is a prime facie CUE under 38 CFR 4.6. Sgt E5: https://www.va.gov/vetapp18/files3/1817506.txt This BVA decision has rating info for the bilateral patella syndrome ( femoral) - I dont know if yours is femoral or not- but this should be claimed , with copy of the C & P exam as well- tell them in the claim that you have filed a CUE on the recent decision and that the examiner diagnosed this issue , as well, based on your STRs. I did not see much in the exam report as to how to rate the issues, but foot,ankle, ,knee, hips, and back issues can all stem from one main lower extremity disability. I know that because I have a biomechanical disability- severe pronation, which can in time affect knees, ankles,hips and back- I am a civilian but the condition I have would be rated at 40-50% if I was a veteran. A vet I posted about on the older pre 2005 board started out with severe flat feet and a small rating, but in time which grew to 100 % in the BVA award, as his condition had affected every part of his lower biomechanical body structure. The bilateral knee problem ( both knees) could easily warrant a higher rating than just the ankle, so that is something to keep in mind if the VA low balls your claim, when they fix their legal error. At some point you might need an independent medical opinion, if they do low ball your rating, but you sure dont need one yet. You have what you need. A VA favorable medical report that establishes the nexus and an additional diagnosis to be claimed.
  8. "In a case where there's 2 Dr with different opinions then this is why its always best to use a specialist , if your claim goes into equipoise the specialist usually wins...over just a MD/PA ect,,ect,,"
  9. So you guys are saying that any veteran who gets a favorable C & P exam and also establishes their nexus , HAS to Get an IMO? ???????? Hey- there are over 1 million 1/2 hits here every year ,and you want to newbies and guests to think that is true? Where is the case law to support your advice- if this is a new criteria in 38 USC/CFR/Mr1 -1MR let's alert the media!!!!!! and how about all those vets and widows like me who succeed at the Regional level- based on our medical evidence who never got an IMO? We have plenty of them here, whose award was based solely on a positive C & P exam. Does that mean the VA will propose to reduce us ALL who had positive C & P exams , because we didn't need an IMO- and because we had an established nexus as well as a bonafide positive C & P exam? An IM0 ( it would have to be an IME in this case,) would only be needed if the C & P exam was lousy and/or did not confirm the nexus- because the lousy C & P examiner did not look over the SMRs. (STRS) But this is a valid CUE- it has nothing to do with an IMO/or IME- the medical evidence has been established. Sgt E5 -your evidence is solid. They made a Legal Error. If they do not rate you properly, maybe that would need an IME, down the road - maybe ---but at this point, they (VA) made a CUE in their denial and if that is not corrected, it will doom the claim. I commend you Sgt- you knew this was a legally incorrect decision. We need you here as an advocate like me. Unfortunately too many vets out there never even know when VA has committed a CUE to their detriment, a CUE like this one ,that can doom a claim forever. I will look for the bilateral patella syndrome ratings tomorrow and post them here and then I will take a break from hadit and let the "experts" handle the CUE claims and the AO claims, and the survivor's claims,etc etc. Maybe that is the hidden agenda here anyhow- But I will be here looking for the established VA case law that supports the IMO comments.
  10. I notice something here more often than I like- My time is limited these days by an issue that can save the lives of veterans. It regards a bill introduced in the Senate. I cannot benefit from it at all but it is one of many veteran issues I work on, off this web site.I have plenty of evidence to support the Bill with- need to send it all to the Senator who introduced the Bill. So I guess I am getting pretty poed by replies that reveal the member does not have a clue. I take the time to read and re read downloads from vets Very Carefully- the examiner even mentioned another issue the veteran has-that can be a valid claim. People are commenting on downloads, C & Ps , decisions, AO regulatuions , etc etc here -without even taking to time to read them. I feel Iam wasting my own time by even doing research and adding links to so many of my replies. Perhaps the opiners here should read the downloads again. This was a contracted C & P exam, this was not a DBQ. Sgt E5------- This CUE is a Beauty- and if you file it through IRIS, as well as send it through the Intake Center it should go faster than you think- It can be tweeked for the exact info as to what you claimed....especially what knee the C & P was done on. I guess I am just tired of the repitition I have to do here sometimes, and I am fed up with cmments that show the member did not even read what the veteran scanned and posted here. This CUE is a beauty. ----------------------------------------------------------------------------- Maybe the VA will send some of you to a C & P exam and the exam is flawless and probative, and the examiner even mentions another disability you have, and supports the inservice nexus as well---for both issues, because they read your SMRs (STRS) and then the VA will DENY your claim, because they violated 38 CFR 4.6 and never even read the C & P you went to, and that the VA paid for, which supported your claim. That is the situation here in this thread. This vet , Sgt E 5, should NOT have to obtain a costly IMO/IME because of the VA's prime facie CUE. We need to be far more literate than the people in the VA. Luckily I barely have time these days to even read more than three unanswered questions-a day- I would probably get really pissed at some of the replies.
  11. Left ankle LHI opinion – GOLDEN!!! Make sure you also claim the bilateral patella syndrome that the LHI examiner found in your STRs.!!! The Knee C & P opinion is also GOLDEN except for one thing- I do not see what knee they are referring to. The CUE I wrote can be tweeked, to make sure the claimed disabilities are exactly wht you claimed and by all means, claim the bilateral patella syndrome, but fdo that as separate from the CUE. I will l try to find the bilateral patella syndrome ratings and will post here. Your nexus was established by the examiner- she actually looked over your STRs. And good for you- you have some evidence with you at the exam.
  12. https://www.postguam.com/news/local/new-agent-orange-bill-introduced/article_bb6e4564-4565-11e9-9980-6f4a3bfe7f99.html In part: "Another Agent Orange legislation aimed to grant herbicide exposure recognition to military veterans who served on Guam and other U.S. territories is slated to get introduced in the U.S. Congress. The Lonnie Kilpatrick Central Pacific Herbicide Relief Act would grant presumptive herbicide exposure status to U.S. service members who served on Guam, in American Samoa, the Northern Mariana Islands and Johnston Atoll, according to a release from Del. Michael San Nicolas. " ( Vets have proven exposure to AO in Guam, and on Johnston Atoll already, but they had definitive proof of exposure, via their MOS.) I am sure I posted those awards here.
  13. PS-if there is an alphanumeric code on the decision- that identifies the VARO and the last idiot ( oops VA employee) who handled your claim)
  14. You can tweek this and I hope others chime in----I will read it over as soon as I can get back on line- have a busy day-hope I didnt overlook anything-and I suugest not only sending this to the Intake Ceneter but also filing this as an IRIS complaint.(which I have done in the past as well as sending to my VARO) (Use Evidence Intake Center address) Date ( I always use Priority Mail and always get a USPS tracking slip) Attention to: ( put here the alphanumeric that appears in the right top of the denial) Put name of VARO here Put Re: C file number here This is a claim of CUE -Clear and Unmistakable Error in your enclosed decision of (date of decision)( I suggest to enclose what you posted here, as copy of the decision )being filed under the auspices of 38 USC 5109,et al. The decision violates 38 CFR 4.6 thus: § 4.6 Evaluation of evidence. The element of the weight to be accorded the character of the veteran's service is but one factor entering into the considerations of the rating boards in arriving at determinations of the evaluation of disability. Every element in any way affecting the probative value to be assigned to the evidence in each individual claim must be thoroughly and conscientiously studied by each member of the rating board in the light of the established policies of the Department of Veterans Affairs to the end that decisions will be equitable and just as contemplated by the requirements of the law. https://www.law.cornell.edu/cfr/text/38/4.6 The errors are the fact that on ( date ) I had the enclosed C & P exam done at ( where )(enclose C & P exam) which fully considered my SMRs and evidence that warranted an award. I had claimed disability in both knees, yet the examiner might have been instructed to only examine one knee and one ankle. Obviously this erroneous denial, based on the fact that 38 CFR 4.6 was violated and the actual C & P exam results were never considered, has had a detrimental outcome to me. 38 CFR 4.6 is a well established tenet of basic VA case law, and the prime “element” of my claim -the actual C & P exam-was never considered. I suggest that you correct this clear and unmistakable error immediately. Respectfully, Enclosures: Exhibit A Denial : pages Exhibit B C & P exam: pages. Total pages enclosed : Also make sure your C file Number, name, address are on everything you send to them. ( sign here) ( I always state Exhibits as A, B, and C and actual use Exhibit stickers that lawyers use. You dont have to do it that way- You can just Number the enclosed if you want. I always also make sure the pages are counted and totalled. I donate a small amount of money every year to a charity , because they send me name, address stickers that means I dont have to write my name on everything, just my C file #, and the name address sticker. CUE:legal error proof of legal error proof of detrimental outcome........I think I covered it all.......
  15. Do I understand the C & P was done only one one knee but you claimed both? Thanks, this will be easy to write CUE for, but I am concerned if they should have examined both knees claimed , but didnt. That too would be part of the CUE . I do not see anything in th Evidence list that reveals they even had the C & P exam. This is a new one for me. VA is usually very quick to find a C & P exam that would deny the claim. Will post CUE claim hopefully within a half hour for you.
  16. My last denial was reversed in 3 weeks after I filed CUE the day after I got it. Dont let anyone tell you a CUE cannot be filed within the appeal period. The Modernization Act holds 2 points I wrote to former Secretary Secretary Shulkin about. One of those points , with evidence, regarded a VARO review for any CUE in every decision before it gets mailed out. The Secretary's office called me -that is how I know they used 2 of my suggestions. I got a nice card from POTUS as well. However, the Modernization Act has no quarantees that every decision will be reviewed this way. We claimants have to know what a CUE is. I have filed and won many CUEs -with 3 now pending. I have filed CUE on CUEs that were awarded. A CUE in any decision the VA sends me, is what I LIVE for!!!! A frontal attack on their stupidity. This is the craps----- if they get a positive C & P result, that should award the claim, I guess they wont consider it as evidence.???? BS to that. !!!!!!!!!!!!!!! I think 100% they comitted CUE, at this point, BUT that is based on what you told us- it is reading their decision, rationale, and the evidence list that will determine if the CUE exists. Cover C file # , name prior to scanning and attaching it here.
  17. Can you scan and attach the VA denial letter, to include their rational and the Evidence list they used. This might be ripe for a CUE ASAP. I can write the CUE for you if I see their denial. "I don't understand why I was denied if the c&p doctor opined claimed conditions was related to service and I have met all 3 elements." Either 1, because the VA hires people who cannot read. 2. or because their contractors are getting too many complaints, 3. or because their contractors are supporting too many awards, 4. or because the VA committed a Clear and Unmistakable error. Please cover your C file #, name, address prior to scanning and attaching the denial here.
  18. "I have letters from two dr stating hubby can not work, due to having dizziness and falling spells. " Was either doctor a Cardiologist, and if so, did they follow the IMO/IME criteria here at hadit? A proposed reduction has to be aggressively fought with Medical evidence. I changed some of the advice I gave here in a prior reply- If you get a faulty C & P exam, 1. complain to the Contractor who hired the doctor to do the exam. Their contact info is here somewhere under a search. 2. Look the doctor up on google to see if they have any expertise at all in the field of the C & P disability 3. Go to the VA Main site , use the Contact Us Button and then Use the Ask a question button and file an IRIS complaint. ( the complaint area is a pop down box.) 4.Call the WH Hot Line 1-855-948-2311 and file a complaint by phone. 5.Sometimes the Best recourse is to get an IMO/IME. Did the VA ignore the "letters from two doctors" in their proposed reduction letter? If so you can file CUE ( if the letters complied with the IMO/IME criteria here at hadit and the doctors gave a full medical rational to their statements, refering to all of his medical records, and if those 2 doctors were cardiologists ) Did you file the SOC within the proper time frame deadline? I have done all of the above many times, as a claimant. My recent WH Hot Line complaint was that the VA has still not sent to me the copy of an actual C & P they did in 2015. I won that claim but still I want to know who did it and what contractor paid them to do it. I believe it was NOT done by anyone with any medical expertise. Lousy C & P exams has come to the attention of the GAO and to a few veterans lawyers. Veterans have been putting up with this crap for decades. These exams are geared solely to denying claims or in your case, to warrant a reduction. In my case the veteran is dead. My husband has not been able to speak for himself for 24 years, dead due to VA health care. My 2015 claim that received the bogus C & P exam ,had evidence from the Top Cardio doctor in VA Central. The denial listed the fact that they had it but never considered it. I CUed them the next day and 3 weeks later they reversed the denial. Personally I feel that you need a strong IMO/IME from a real cardio doctor- unless that is what you have, from 2 doctors, that VA might have completely ignored or found not compelling enough to drop the reduction. As a widow claimant Many times since my husband died, I have NEVER recieved a proper initial posthumous C & P exam. I only needed IMos for one of those claims, and fought back all denials aggressively at the RO level....except the BVA award, wwhich I obtain 3 IMos for- and even paid for a 4th I didnt even need. In 1988 the VA proposed to reduce my husband's 30% SC for PTSD to 10%. In that case ,I wrote the NOD, using their statements, the regulations they used, and the actual documented facts of the case. They dropped the proposed reduction as soon as they read the NOD. It took 8 months for them to read it-I knew they had no legal position at all that would warrant the reduction. VA Ultimately awarded (posthumously) 100% P & T SC for my husband's PTSD-with an EED 2 years after they restored his 30%. Proposed reduction from 30% to 10% PTSD -Christmas eve 1988, NOD filed early 1989 , proposal dropped Nov 1989. EED posthumous award for 100% P & T for SC PTSD.Nov 1991. Figure that. It just points out how we must never accept a bogus C & P exam. And if it costs $$$$ for an IMO/IME- it will be a smart investment, based on the actual medical facts of the case, costing far less than the accumulated loss of a reduction can be.
  19. I suggest that you make sure VA has ALL of your private medical records. Any additional evidence should be uploaded. I think we all worry too much! And you are dealing with a lot. But Evidence is everything. "I might be able to cope with everything a bit better if I was just assured that my current AO/PC would be paid back to at least back to the diagnosis date, of last week, no matter when I file for it. As of now – the latest date for that date would be 3/29/19, as my active ITF expires then." The VA, with some exceptions, uses the date of the claim for the retro amount. "Since I filed my claim when I still had a prostate, much has changed" "In the past few days I recieved a call from QTC, saying I had an appointment with a PA for a C&P exam - for my 'contention' of prostate cancer, this Thursday. " It would not hurt to bring any medical evidence you can, as to this disability. " I had my prostate out at Duke Hospital (great care btw) - however since I was being seen at the Duke Cancer Center / Prostate Cancer Center, i did not include Duke Hospital in the forms. The letter states not to send any medical records from anyone else other then those listed already listed." I think the Duke Hospital records are critical to the claim. Do you have any of those records? If not, I assume you do have their discharge certificate, after the surgery. "The letter states not to send any medical records from anyone else other then those listed already listed." Regardless of what the letter says- These records are critical. VA cannot properly determine a rating without all evidence of the surgery and what the rating should be- Is it possible that the Duke Cancer Center had them and that VA does have them as well, from the Cancer Center I hope all goes well at the C & P exam for you. It should. The reason I make this point about evidence is that we recently had a claimant here who supplied ,as new and material evidence, a document she had for 8 years. VA was aware of the document existed and asked her for it.When she sent it to them ,as she re opened her claim, her EED was the date they received the document. She thought they owed her the additional 8 years as well. The VA cannot make a proper EED finding ( Earliest Effective Date) on something, that was critical evidence, that they asked for, but never received from this claimant - for 8 years. I feel you will certainly do OK at the C & P exam. Please let us know how it turns out.
  20. And a 100% P & T designation means that your dependents should be eligible for CHAMPVA-the VA Civilian Health and Medical Program. Their web site has all the info and the application is there at the site. https://nvf.org/champva-civilian-health-and-medical-program/ Depending on the 100% P & T EED that VA gave you, their could even be potential retro benfefits under these programs. I have used both CHAMPVA and DEA and they are fabulous benefits. When my original DEA limiting date ran out, I paid an addition 8 thousand to finish my degree. Then I subsequently proved my husband died directly to his service (AO)and DEA had to give me a new limiting date as well as, and with proof of my paid tuition for the period in which I paid for it myself, they refunded the 8 thousand. Also the VA will extend the age barrier under DEA, ( which I believe is still age 26) with any period of military service, regarding the dependent. What I mean is that my daughter served 7 years and her DEA entitlement date included those 7 years to her DEA eligibility period. You might be eligible for some property tax exceptions as well. Here in NY vets get exemptions under 3 theories, but the exception only covers 2. As a widow of a deceased 100% SC P & T vet I get two exceptions on my property taxes.
  21. I need to take back part of my Yippee! There are problems with the way the bill has been worded.....I laid all that out at Ben Krauses's site this AM, under the article regarding: " $950k Settlement: Veteran ‘Gutted Like A Fish’ By Incompetent VA Surgeon " It is not the fault of the Senators who introduced this bill- they simply do not know what I know and I am refering them in the first paragraph to a copy of my 1151 award attached, whcih contains the FTCA results....multiple doctors in 2 VAMCS, never reported to the NPDB. It has been taking me quite some time to prepare a letter to Senator Gardner, cced to the other Senators who proposed this. I need to reduce the letter I already wrote. There is a lot to this issue. And I have a stack of evidence from over 20 years but need to send them the most impotant stuff.... hard to decide....it is all important. I do not want to see this Bill become just lip service that the VA can ignore- as they have done in the past -countless times.... as I can prove. The Bill can Save Lives- if they heed my suggestions to amend it....with evidence I will attach.
  22. His time at Fox was cut into by the Homeland Security hearing- basically the Secretary made a brief , but very good point- traditionally vets with possible suicidal ideation went one to one with a MH doctor-for VA care but the VA wants to get the families of vets more involved in their MH care- particularly if the veteran might become suicidal at some point. Many families of veterans do not know what to look for in a vet who might be depressed enough to contemplate suicide. It would help them to know what signs to look for and also, it would show the vet they do have a support system,if they get involved with any MH care. Still-this is a difficult approach sometimes. A good friend of mine, Vietnam vet, worked every day, who never showed signs of depression, PTSD, or any other MH issue , killed himself years ago. The sheriff who found him told me how he had done it, and it was in his opinion, a planned event that only someone who had been in combat or familiar with guns in any other way, would know how to set it up. The wife was shocked- as well as all who knew him. It might have been from survival guilt- one of the most horrible things any vet can suffer from, knowing they lived, but their buddys died.
  23. Hill and Ponton ( vet lawyers) advise requesting any missing Rating sheet from the VA https://www.hillandponton.com/rating-code-sheets-demystifying-va-ratings-compensation/ They also advise that, if a POA handled the claim, they might have that info . (or maybe-in my opinion, be able to get it faster than a claimant's request to the VA.) It is possible they did not rate the DMII because they denied due to no "boots on ground" ,yet with proof of the ship's list exposure he had, they would have to posthumously rate the DMII. It might become a Nehmer claim, under Footnote One, as mine was - and it fell into the "should have been coded" part of the nehmer Court Order because my husband's IHD was never diagnosed or rated by the VA, yet was part of the DIC wrongful death award, and the prime cause of his death. I have explained Footnote one in our AO forum with the help of Rick Spataro, Head Nehmer lawyer at NVLSP. VA put the ratings of three of my issues into the Nehmer decision. There was no specific Rating sheet. My original DIC award did contain a full rating sheet.Missing from it however , were ratings for some of the malpracticed issues , recovered under CUE. I think a formal AO claim, specifically for DMII and/or IHD, and any other presumptive he had will trigger a full posthumous exam of the established medical record he had, to determine the ratings. VA, by time of Nehmer , already had from me ,a timeline of the very first evidence my husband had for IHD....in his established medical records. I had previously done a complete timeline ( based on the established medical records) for his undiagnosed/untreated DMII, which they have never rated.I also had 3 IMOs. I got all I wanted from that decision, and could CUE it ,but I am satisfied with their award because it was their 3rd death decision and it was for direct SC death, as the newer 4th IHD DIC award was ,as well. The IHD retro covered a 6 year period of VA malpractice for the IHD. Due to my timeline- based solely on VA medical records. If I had no proof of AO exposure (my husband was with 1stMARDIV 65-66 Vietnam)I do not feel VA would have done any type of posthumous C & P exam to rate the IHD, if they did not consider him as a Vietnam incountry veteran. A full autopsy had been done as well, because my husband was an organ donor and that supported all of my 1151/FTCA issues. Also a Peer reviw that supported my charges was "missing" from the VA until I ordered my C file. The 6 page review (that VA told me had Never existed) was right at the bottom of my C file. I had to fight the FTCA issue without it but used it for my AO IHD claim. You could request the rating sheet Via the IRIS system, if there was no POA on the diabetes denial decisions. But I dont think they will ever rate the DMII until the AO claim is received, along with proof of exposure.
  24. He will be speaking about this: https://www.whitehouse.gov/briefings-statements/president-donald-j-trump-issues-national-call-action-empower-veterans-end-national-tragedy-veteran-suicide/ This is certainly a "national tragedy" .
  25. That is very concerning- I cannot imagine how that could happen. I suggest you call Pres Trump's White House Veterans hot line- 1-855-948-2311 If someone can hack your ebenefits account, I bet they can hack thousands of ebenefits accounts.,... how did you find out it was actually hacked?
×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

{terms] and Guidelines