Berta

Vicki- I stand corrected !!!!-based on your experience-and I respect highly what you just said- now he is at the top of my CAVC llawyer list! I just could not understand why this was done-with the treatise or why the brief was not accepted by the court-they didnt elaborate. One of my local vets had a similiar situation but his lawyers were AWFUL! Thank you for immediately correcting what I said--- yes you are right- nothing ventured, nothing gained- He might have needed to gain a little more time and this shows he got that for the vet- Thank You.

With the P & T 100 % status- they should have attached Chap 35 app for you and each child- for VA educational benefits. Also you and the kids might be eligible for CHAMPVA- a great health care program. You have to call or access their web site for the CHAMPVA app. VA might send you a letter telling you this info-it is separate award that you have to apply for and they(CHAMPVA) determine if you are eligible. I got this letter years ago but I dont think the VA always sends these out like they should.

I hate to be blunt and ask again but is he maintaining sobriety? If not the VA has a way out to deny any SC claims regarding his kidney problems. The VA- (I gripe about them all the time but they do save lives and also are capable of great medical care) the VA provides excellent help with alcoholism. At our local VA they have AA programs during the week and also Saturday AM.I went to a few with some vets-my second date with Rod was an open AA meeting. Took a while to comprehend it all- a vastly different world-and it was wonderful. Open meetings are available for anyone going there with a recovering alcoholic. Alanon is available too for concerned family members. AA meetings are available in just about everywhere in the world and usually often within 20-30 minutes from one's home. I was surprised recently up here in the desolate boonies of the Adirondack hills- to learn that there are two AA weekly meetings or more within 10-15 minutes at two local churches.I thought the closest one was at the VA.

The VBM , pages 334 to 357 has considerable info on these types of SMC. I am stuck on this : They define the L1/2 and also put (P) before L1/2 on it-page 349 Under the P award , additional disabilities can be expanded-page 353- Do you have a copy of the VBM? detailed info on these types of claims.

GOOD- however CHief- they dont seem to accept the SSA award letter at all- it is the actual SSA records that they need Your claim sounds excellent. Will you have anyone from your POA at the DRO hearing with you?

Why did SSA turn him down? I assume his alcohol dependency is gone, and hope it is. One of the first PTSD vets I ever met died in his 30s due to alcohol abuse. The VA did all they could to get him to stop drinking. He died leaving a wife and three small son. She did not have a chance to get DIC. Although the VA considered this as willful misconduct on the vet's part, she could have claimed PTSD caused his drinking. However, in documented VA records she had told the VA his heavy drinking had started way before the service and Vietnam. No DIC at all. I believe that only a good independent medical opinion could help this type of claim and an established nexus. If he can prove this: "He was sexually asualted and then started drinking heavily" he has a nexus that could have caused the drinking. Proof would be documented hospital reports, personnel reports, charges he filed,buddy statements,or if not witnessed by anyone, any statements that reveal an "outcry" as the legal profession calls it- meaning any evidence whatsoever that he documented this event after it happened -by telling others. These would be buddy statements secifcally about his demeanor and stress just after this event happened and as it was described to the buddys.

Yes- a vet can file for secondary conditions due to side affects of SC meds. Some vets file this as a claim under Section 1151- a good move unless the medication is necessary and did not involve negligence or foreable risk. "ORDER Compensation benefits under the provisions of 38 U.S.C.A. § 1151 for skin cancer based on medications prescribed by treating VA physicians is granted." from: http://www.va.gov/vetapp06/files3/0617465.txt Sec 1151 can lock a vet in however- best to ry for secondary- there are many claims at the BVA regarding the issue of medication for SC as causing additional disability. Often good medical printouts can support this type of claim. IMos are better.

From Larry VA Watchdog: http://www.vawatchdog.org/nfDEC06/nf121406-1.htm Shouldn't other VAMC be sending this info out too????? "The letter advises veterans that their care at a non-VA emergency center might be paid for by the VA. Last year, the Spokane hospital spent nearly $8 million on care for veterans at non-VA facilities, according to a federal audit released in February."

Chief- do you mean you sent them the formal TDIU form 21-8940? I think you do- an award from SSA for the same claimed disability -with strong nexus (link) to your service should get you TDIU. Has the VARO sent you an authorization form in order to obtain your SSA records- and if they have -have you checked with the SSA and also the VA (you could use the email inquery system) to make sure that SSA got the request and that the VA has received the SSA records? (they lost your SMRs? service records?---the SSA probably still has a copy of them.) Have you tried to get them yourself from NARA or SSA? If I were you I would also double check to make sure they got your TDIU form.

I posted this info before but it bears repeating- If a claim goes to the CAVC- no additional evidence can be presented. Very few claims succeed at the CAVC and they succeed on what is in the file when the CAVC gets it- this means that in the years it takes to get on the CAVC docket the veteran should do ALL they can to bolster the claim-prior to getting to that point- This is good example of what I mean: http://webisys.vetapp.gov/isysquery/irl738a/2/doc "On December 28, 2005, the appellant, through counsel, filed his brief . On February 10, 2006, the Secretary filed a motion to strike a portion of the appellant's brief that quotes and relies on an attachment to that brief. The attachment is an excerpt from a treatise on orthopedic practice, the second edition of the Principles of Orthopaedic Practice ( McGraw-Hill 1997). See Appellant's Brief at 8-9. The Secretary also seeks to strike the attachment. The Secretary argues, inter alia, that: ( 1) the document in question is not contained in the record on appeal (ROA ); (2) the document was not part of the proceedings before the Secretary and the Board of Veterans' Appeals (Board), as required by 38 U.S.C. 7252(:); and (3) pursuant to the Court's caselaw and Rules of Practice and Procedure, the document may not be considered by the Court. Motion to strike at 1-3." The VA motion to Strike the attachment (the treatise) was successful. "Upon consideration of the foregoing, it is ORDERED that the Secretary's motion to strike is granted. It is further ORDERED that the appellant's brief is not accepted for filing. The Clerk will return the appellant's brief with this order. It is further ORDERED that the appellant file a brief which complies with the rules of the Court within 14 days after the date of this order. It is further ORDERED that the Secretary's motion for an extension of time until April 10, 2006, to file his brief is dismissed as moot." Lucky vet- he got another chance as the brief was unacceptable-but still cannot support the claim with additional evidence- Blanford V Nisholson The attorney he had was Daniel G. Krasnegor- who is sure off my list for any potential representation. Apparent the attorney did not know this facet of CAVC case law.

Nathan- I would file this claim ASAP. Didn't they brief you in outprocessing as to the imporatance of filing claims within a year after discharge? Also the mil is supposed to encourage new vets to take a complete copy of their SMRs with them when they get discharged- this is important because -when a claim is filed with the first year of discharge-and then granted- the EED retro date goes back to the very first day after service. I think you should make sure you have the SMRs and this documentation to support the claim. Claims have to have 3 major things-(the Hickson elements) for a proper resolve-in most cases- Current diagnosed disability. Inservice med recs etc to suuport inservice event or disability Nexus to support the inservice event, illness, accident etc- You have the Nexus in your SMRs- you need current diagnosed disability- and some treatment records- the VA just loves paper- they want proof that a disability is ratable as shown by continuous treatment and meds. PS-I cant stress this point enough- A vet called me this weekend upset with a anxiety disorder denial- He says he is given some sort of anxiety med by his general practioner doctor. and an anxiety diagnosis- He has NO actual current treatment records at all- He had a weak nexus and needs to find more support for that- I gave him his unit web site for a possible buddy statement- I am not familiar at all with his claim- He was surely denied due to the fact that he cannot prove current and documented continuous treatment for anxiety-the meds alone won't do it--- I dont know how he could even get an IMO from this doctor- worse yet -how can a doc prescribe meds but not treat the reason for the meds? There might be something he has overlooked- dont have the whole story- but this is a very important facet of any type of claim- current and documented treatment of disability.

Andrews cannot be assessed without the context of Deshotel: http://72.14.205.104/search?q=cache:8TEeiH...=3&ie=UTF-8 NVLSP and the AL have addressed this issue since the Andrews opinion was rendered: http://72.14.205.104/search?q=cache:YrcjB5...=7&ie=UTF-8 In essense they are saying that a veteran or their vet rep has to NOD an undecided or inferred claim- In Feb 2007- since I have a claim filed in Feb 2003 under Bonny V Principi regs-that I was promised "administrative decision" on twice by the VARO VSM-yet appears to be off their radar- I will file a NOD as they suggest and also a Writ ogf Mandamus- and see how that goes- I think these 2 decisions have to be read very carefully- I filed 6 claims, and withdrew one-changed it into CUE- Four -they have been working on- although the AO claim was denied first in 2004-still this does not reflect what the Fed Cir quote says- However when I got the illegal transfer to the BVA that they remanded- one claim that they added to the main appealed claim- has never been decided- and I challenged that point in my remand request- it sounded like an Andrews attempt= They did not cite Andrews or Deshotel and that claim is now presently with the rating board.I dont think they could pulled that anyhow-on me- Andrews and Deshotel involve specific scenarios that do not apply to all claims.

Lori- this is WONDERFUL! and shows that the VARO can do the right thing- and not take forever- please stay with us- your experience and encouragement to others will help so many---- but do take a BREAK too----sometimes it is hard to put it all down even when the award letter comes! The stress lingers ,many stay in the battle mode, even after the battle is won- and sometimes depression can set in- after the fatique of it all------- You did great and an victory in any award is a victory for ALL veterans.

"I have never seen an instance where a VARO awarded backpay in excess of 15K or so. I think those claims will probably collect dust at the VARO level. But they are the exception and not the rule." They did in my case Bob- well over that figure on a CUE and also two other claims I had in the past-and for other vets I helped- one friend of mine got well over $100,000 in one retro check and others I know and have helped -with claims at this same VARO have gotten very large awards=well over 15 K. I do agree however=that these seem to be the claims they stall on the most. At some point-based on evidence- they certainly know there is large retro involved- it is one reason I believe my AO claim has been there for almost 4 years.

Hm -the guy I talked to there told me they handle PTSD claims and other types of psychiatric IMos too- maybe I misunderstood him- Here are quite a few : Not in any specific order-mixed in with other specialties- http://www.jurispro.com/search/profile/subcategory/3599 Although these are IMO docs for civil/criminal proceedings- so is MedOpin's list-- but still many of them provide IMOs for Individuals. PSybar might help too---- http://www.psybar.com/critique_services.htm It would not hurt to even call any psychiatrist in your phone book-to see if they could prepare an IMO.

Here is a list of NOVA lawyers: http://www.attorneys4veterans.com/ I dont know if they are strickly pro bono or will be able to accept a fee-will ask them-

check that retro carefully- they hardly ever break it down unless you ask- I wrote to them some time back that it appeared they forgot about 300-400 in my DIC and about 11 thou in my other DIC offset refund-due to a CUE I had that the RC awarded. Within 3-4 weeks I got checks for both errors they made - they almost snookered me- These types of questions -sent to them-not in the form of a NOD- go directly to Finance and they work faster than the claims dept.

Well stated Jangrin- Dr. Bash does not handle psychiatric claims IMos-but There are plenty of docs who do- http://www.medopinions.com will respond to questions sent via their site- after contacting them at the site with brief info- they called me within a few hours and discussed the type of IMO I want-from an oral pathologist- if I need another IMO- Then -I feel their rates are comparable to Dr. Bash's- when they heard the basis for the opinion and what evidence I already had (they only need a few records from the med recs and a few other things-) they reduced the fee and said they could render this opinion within 5 days or a week upon receipt of the med evidence and the check. Medopinions has a long list of specialists and also is aware of what the VA needs as they too have prepared IMos on VA claims. There are other sites on the web for IMOs- even other doctors used for IMOs in successful BVA claims can often be found on the net-by googling their name. One of my local vet's docs got furious when we asked him for another IMO- he did not understand- if the IMO does not conform to what the VA wants -they will reject it. He prepared another IMO and the vet won the claim. In my third IMO Dr. BAsh rebutted the fact that not only was the VA's med opinion "medically inaccurate" and expanded on this- he also brought up the fact that the opinion did not conform to what the VA wants - no rationale, no curriculum vitae regarding expertise and VA's use of an outdated medical reference, also he used all medical evidence available on the vet and the opining VA doc used only a few records. and reminded the VA that he is fully versed in VA regs and case law criteria on disability claims. Pete said: "I would rather have an opinion from Dr Bash than hire a Lawyer" me too but I might have to get a lawyer to get the VA to read his stuff.

The USS Pratt has a reunion info contact at this site- dont know how recent this info is- Reunion info can be very helpful if a vet needs to contact someone for a buddy statement: http://www.destroyers.org/Reunions/Ships-W.html This might be more updated: (the whistle is loud) http://www.williamvpratt.com/ She was with the 6th fleet during that time frame: "She received further combat systems updates in 1979-80, operated with the Sixth Fleet and visited Northern European waters in 1981, and took part in Lebanon Crisis actions in 1982, including providing gunfire support for U.S. Marines at Beirut." from : http://138.147.50.20/photos/sh-usn/usnsh-w/dlg13.htm Navy archives might be able to give you more as to location during that time period- http://www.navsource.org/archives/05/0213.htm Crew list here and also a link to "accidents" aboard ship- that might help someone out there- http://navysite.de/dd/ddg44.htm What a beauty she was- more at: http://138.147.50.20/photos/sh-usn/usnsh-w/dlg13.htm

This link is from email from one of my vet orgs-I see the news is getting to everyone out there- from:Vietnam Combat Veterans ltd: TIME NETWORK 1 5:00pm - 6:00pm [CST] Firebase Veterans Hour http://www.gcnlive.com/listenlive.htm then click on: LISTEN LIVE Network 1 Rick Townsend's guest, Arthur N. Bernklau of Veterans for Constitutional Law, Ltd., will discuss recently enacted legislation that ends the VA's 75 year prohibition against Veterans having their own attorneys to represent their claims before VA Regional Offices and the Board of Veterans Appeals. Art is the Executive Director of Veterans for Constitutional Law, Ltd. A watchdog of various federal government agencies, especially the VA. Art will discuss the latest issues that our veterans are facing with the VA, including recently enacted legislation that the VA doesn't want you to hear about . His unique and on-target reporting has made him the bane of those who try to cover up many abuses and corruption in the care for our veterans. Art will also discuss his involvement in current issues and the political scene. Art may be contacted at: Veterans for Constitutional Law, Ltd., 112 Jefferson, Port Jefferson, NY 11777, 631/474-4261.

It is VA case law itself (38 CFR Adjudicatiok Book C- 4.3 and 4.6) that states how vital proper acknowledgement and consideration of IMOs and ANY other competent medical evidence is to a proper resolve of a claim. VA has ignored all pther med evidence I have sent -to include the IMos. I have just emailed a complaint to the VBA -asking Deputy Secretary Mansfield to send my IMOs to the VARO. I will mail them to him, with 5 bucks for postage- after I get a response. I went through this during my last claims-at some point it was taking them so much time to deal with my complaints that they read the evidence and made awards. What concerns me the most is not the VA- I am used to fighting them- But I have a POA paid by the State (taxpayers) that needs to give me some answers. I have support from the VA itself that they )my POA) did not do what they said they would, in my behalf, via their mail and email, nor have I received benefit of their mission statement-yet- You can well imagine that -if I have to get a lawyer in June- that lawyer will have many nuances to consider to build their 20% fee in addition to my claim. I just LOVE litigation.

cant wait to get a lawyer= I believe that Dr. Bash has basis for a lawsuit too----and a lawyer can advise me on that- long story there-nothing to do with VA- My IM0s- rdawg- have never been rejected or ignored by the VA-they have never been considered at all- Wednesday =the VA confirmed that they have never been received -in over 2 years- this is by far different than what I thought- My POA has to answer on this too---they claim the IMos were personally presented to the DRO by them in 2005 and sent again in Sept 2006. these IMos were also presented not only by me (with tracking slips, but also with the remand in September, and also sent via my vet reps-by fax to the VARO- Certainly this is a very bizarre new situation-as of this Wednesday- because it indicates that- these IMos are getting to VA but not to the c file-at all- I am sending my 3 IMos to Deputy Secretary VA-Gorgon H. Mansfield- Monday- with 5 bucks enclosed and asking him to send the IMos to the VARO himself,via Priority mail. I do not want anyone here to feel that my IMOS from Dr.Bash have been unsuccessful. They support my claim completely. Someone -with access to my c file-does not want my AO claim to succeed. (I am sending the inquery response to RC Monday too- as it supports my FTCA claim for damages.)

I am very happy to have obtained two IMos from Dr. Bash- The first one (2004) service connects my husband's death-in detail and the second one had a VA quackola opinion from 2005 -that he demolished- Neither opinion is redundant to or cummulative of the other. He also incorporated an addition statement - from a former VA Neurologist- which I had obtained prior to calling Dr. Bash. A statement that was extremely probative and Dr, Bash understood it's significance. In over 2 years of numerous submisisons by myself and my POA-of these IMOs, the opinions still have never been addressed by the VARO. Even the Aug 2006, sent back from the BVA with my remand is gone--- as well as what my vet reps said they sent. Wednesday- the VA via email told me they have never received these IMOs. So whether you get a good IMO or not- you might have to move a mountain to get it read. The NVLSP itself suggests IMOs and also the VA is supposed to suggest them to -within the VCAA Notice-in certain types of claims. There are other IMos docs too- I have contacted Medopinions.com for something outside of Dr. Bash's expertise-if needed. I got a discount on the fee as soon as they realised this 4 th IMO only depends on using a few med records. Their fees at Medopinions is comparable to Dr. BAsh's fee and they have prepared many IMOs for VA like he has. IMOs are a great expense. Dr. Bash emailed me back that my claim sounded good on basis of a few email statements I sent him- 5-6 days after he got the med recs etc, he called here and I knew what he would say- if you are confident that the IMO will support your claim-it is the best way these days to get a proper award. Dont go by what has happened to my IMOs- I am in a most unusual situation-which will be resolved- A IMO doc cannot perform miracles but they do see things that we can't in med recs. There certainly are claims that his IMOs could not support and he has these as well as successes at his web site and the BVA- One BVA stated the VA doc said "that radiologist" in her opinion. I laughed at that one- his credentials outweigh most of theirs- Jangrin (under a search you will find it) posted a letter from the VBA to Dr. Bash- that letter speaks volumes for his ability. My claim- proof that VA misdiagnosed Rod's diabetes since 1988 (from AO)and his undiagnosed and untreated diabetes contributed to his conditions at death. Dr. Bash concurred. He did not need the SMRs-(the AO exposure was already confirmed -nexus established) but all med recs, the autopsy, death certificate and the VA's own admissions that they caused Rod's death. (FTCA settlement and Section 1151 award letter. I tabbed and highlighted the med recs-and VA central documents that were specific to the claim- he read everything but that helped-to highlight these records. If a nexus to service remains unestablished-he needs the complete SMRs too. I sent the med recs etc-to Dr. Bash- with a cover letter identifying specific evidence that was crucial to my claim.

I said this myself this AM here Jay- more knowledge at hadit then these PAID vet reps get- As you say some are very very good -the other ones-if they dont know an answer- will make something up and think the vet wouldn't check it out- I got a DIC claim from one of my orgs (Vietnam Combat Veterans, ltd) they send me all DIC claims- I couldnt believe what this widow was told by the DAV- then again this is what the DAV told me too in 1995- She has a great claim and the NSO could have caused her financial damages- but she didnt believe him- good thing- If a NSO or vet rep causes financial damages they can be sued in state courts for negligence- a suit recently was won by a vet- The reality is as dumb as some of them are- competent supporting medical evidence will eventually make a claim succeed-so no monetary damages would have occurred- but if I was a lawyer and they allow vets to get lawyers I would 1. look for potential Sec 1151 claim(did they malpractice on vet)that would be first with FTCA potential 2. look for the evidence needed to award the claim and 3. see if some vet rep might have caused damages in handling a past denied claim. 4. see if that claim had a CUE issue that could be raised. I would look for- as a lawyer - ANY potential way for the vet to succeed via the claim or in any other way to get money-if their claim was buggered. There are many ways a lawyer could consider as they would have a financial motivation unlike the paid SOs.

I felt it was well worth the money and helped me to help vets- however I got my Certificate in Basic VA Training Course in 1997. The regs ,etc -have changed so much since that-when I get my degree- hopefully this spring- I might take it again-an updated version-I guess it took me a few months -forget-they grade your work-etc- Vet Reps and Sos usually take the very same course from NVLSP and then attend the big seminar before they get accreditation.(I dont think the VA requires this though for accreditation-not sure) Problem is- my vet reps took this course years ago-too- it is up to them to keep up on the regs and everything else- they dont even have internet access so I dont know how they do that- the only copies of the VBM in their office I paid for myself and sent to them- I think this is a fundamental problem for some vet reps- without internet access they cannot click on BVA or VA or CAVC or the regs as fast as we can-I am not even sure they have access to M21-1 and they cannot even find web sites for a vet who needs to contact their unit for a buddy statement. I cant live without all of the above-and probably can do more in a few hours for vets than they can do all week- I also believe the hour interview that my vet reps do is a big waste of time- it usually gets tangential when all they need is proof of service etc, documented disability, and a nexus -or way to find one- and then get going on the claim- My former vet rep would BS so much with vets that he probably forgot what they even came in to see him for- I believe that the course is great but the best investment a vet (and potential student for the NVLSP cert) is to buy the VBM. I have bought them since 1991.