Ask Your VA Claims Questions | Read Current Posts
Read Disability Claims Articles
Search | View All Forums | Donate | Blogs | New Users | Rules
ferris7060
-
Posts
39 -
Joined
-
Last visited
Content Type
Profiles
Forums
Events
VA Disability and Benefits Information
VA Benefits News
Store
Posts posted by ferris7060
-
-
Jumped the gun, I am P&T. When I got the actual paperwork for my decision it said it black and white, I also got the brochure for education benefits and ChampVA. AWESOME!!!!! Thanks to all who answered. Patience never has been a virtue of mine.
-
I just got 100% IU and thought my kids could go to school for free as long as they went in the State of Maine. Now I'm wondering because everything I'm finding sounds like you have to be P&T. Is that the case for the education benefits?
-
Well, just got off the phone with my rep and he read me the official reconsideration decision. 100% IU!!!
I applied for IU on 8/12/10. Got denied and a proposal to decrease my Raynauds from 40% to 10% to boot. BAD DAY IN MY HOUSE!
Asked for a reconsideration hearing. I thought I was waiting for a hearing date, but when I checked ebenefits it said the case was in notification yesterday, and closed today. I called my rep, pretty upset thinking that they had just ignored my request for a hearing and denied IU and most likely even took my Raynauds.
But he read me the decision. Raynauds was NOT reduced. Migraines went from 30% to 50%, and IU was granted :)
I LOVE Togus...always have. I knew I was screwed when they sent the claim to Buffolo for a decision and I was right, but Togus decided the reconsideration.
The only "new" evidence I submitted was something they should have looked at in the first place because I asked them to- a decision from 08' with highlighted statements about the regularity of my migraine headaches and 12 different appt dates where migraines were addressed (which the 8/12/11 decision stated I had no proof of even complaining about until my latest C&P exam).
It is a good day in my world, 10 years from the very date that I flew out of Maine for boot camp! AND only about two months from the date of getting the denial!
-
I'm not saying at all that the VA puts any weight in their own regulations, they don't, as far as there being any consequences to them, or anything favorable to you if they don't apply them. I am going to request today, but I agree that it's probably too late.
Under the auspices of VA’s duty to assist, itmust advise the veteran about the types of evidence – medical and nonmedical –that the veteran should submit to avoid a reduction in the disability rating.
VA must inform veteran about right to a Predetermination Hearing. If the veteran wants one, he
or she must request it within 30 days of notice. See 38 CFR § 3.105(i).
-
ferris - you can do anything you want, it's just a matter of whether the VA will accept it. I'd file everything, just to make sure. I see the date you received the notice was almost 30 days ago. Be sure to get that request for a hearing in today. Hand deliver if necessary!!! Don't let them tell you it's too late, either. You need to have everything written. A general rule is "if it can't be read - it wasn't said!"
pr
One of my problems is, they NEVER SENT ME ANYTHING! It was writen in the decision that reduction was proposed, but no letter since. Nothing about what to do next or even a formal letter saying they were doing it. Just the decision that said at the end, this is proposed, you have 60 days to submit additional evidence. I did not know I could even have a hearing, let alone I only had 30 days to tell them I wanted a hearing. I am SERIOUSLY disliking the VA right now. I used the word evil last week, and kinda got some heat, but I'm leaning towards it again. My VSO keeps telling me I can't have a hearing for the reduction (smart guy, I should really trust him).
-
Thank you. I just got an IU decision on August 23rd. It denied IU basically because it denied I had any Migraine headaches (although I am QUITE confident of my Migraine proof). In that same decision they proposed a reduction in Raynauds. I want to know if I can request the reduction hearing AND apeal the entire decision at the same time, or if I have to wait until the reduction hearing decision before appealing the entire decision. Since Raynauds is involved in both.
-
I got a decision that I completely disagree with. I have two problems, one they proposed to reduce my 40% for Raynaud's, and two they completely ignored ALL evidence for my migraines.
I have already asked questions on here regarding both of those things. What I am wondering now is, can I BOTH file for a hearing in my reduction of Raynauds AND file an NOD for the entire decision. I'd hate to put my appeal of the entire decision on hold waiting for the Raynauds reduction hearing. But, I have to act on the Raynauds now as they will execute the reduction quickly if not.
Also, I read somewhere that you cannot CUE if you still have the option of appealing the claim, is that true?
-
Surround them with evidence. Use every argument you have. The quality of the exam to reduce is an issue. However, I would not bet all the marbles on the length of the exam to reduce. There is more going on than the length of time of the exam. Your focus on the "ordinary conditions of life" is good. However, it might need some bolstering as Iidentified later in this post.
I have not read anything about the first exam. However, it is very possible the first examiner reported subjective complaints that meet the criteria for 40% and the two exams they are using to reduce were not a proper representation of your subjective statements as to the frequency of daily attacks. Because they are using two exams and they have interpreted these exams to show an improvement, it is more important to focus on the inadequacy of the reporting of your symptoms rather than any blanket attack based on the length of the exam.
The examiner's one misrepresented sentence that your attacks are once weekly, rather than daily, needs to be addressed as specifically being a misrepresentation of what you told the examiner. Using the three paragraphs explaining your ongoing battle with the disease does not override the first sentence addressing frequency of attacks. The doctor just noted what you are doing. I would not count on the VA to give consideration to the steps you take to prevent the attacks without medical justification. If they continue with the reduction despite your argument that the attacks are daily and you think the steps you take are an issue, I would recommend that you get a medically approved management plan prescribing the steps you take.
Raynaud's is a vascular disease. So is angioedema. At this point in my life angioedema can kill me. My symptoms progressed from mild to life threatening over a period of ten years. I have required emergency life saving treatment in an ER on 20 occasions. I went to great lengths to explain the steps I had to take to control the disease. Nobody listened to me until I obtained a medically prescribed management plan explaining the restrictions I need to take to manage the disease.
The doctors wrote reports explaining to the VA that I cannot work in buildings and I need to leave any environment including open air environments where I smell any odor or when I see chemicals being used. The doctors noted that asking people what chemicals are in use or reading labels is not adequate due to the fact that when chemical are combined they form other unidentified chemical compounds. I had this management plan reviewed and updated ten years after the first such plan and obtained an opinion that my condition would not expect to improve at anytime during my lifetime. Additionally, the doctors said that any experimentation or testing to determine whether or not the condition had improved could kill me and was not recommended. This stopped future exams.
Your right, I should have had a management plan all along. I do feel completely ignorant that I didn't see this coming. I felt that I was doing what the last Rheumatologist I saw told me to do, and symptoms had not improved, so that was it, just live my life. The lesson is learned that when dealing with the VA always have proof, proof, proof. I'll do the best I can to turn it around. If it does get taken I will have more proof then I would ever need to get it back- but it will be a lengthy process.
-
Im glad it helped.
Do not let the Va buffalo you into thinking you have to submit to the reductions. They want you to give up. Instead, knowledge is power.
The VA has to show "actual improvement"...did your condition improve since you were awarded (or continued) benefits? Did this "actual improvement" happen and then there was another VA decision which continiued your present rating?
Read Katrina Eagles article over thoroughly, and, you are right, apply it and it will probably save your house.
I'm going in first thing Monday to request the hearing. Them that will give me the time to get into the Rheumatologist. When I was in the military I went every morning, as requested by a Rhematologist) and showed them my hands- morning dampness brings it on everytime. He noted each day that attack was present. What I really need is the same commitment from my physician, but I'll never get it. I could show it daily until the hearing simply by not wearing gloves and driving there.
Knowledge IS power. Although I hate the situation, and I'm horrified that it might not give me the results I need, I still really enjoy looking up the laws and finding the ones that fit my situation. I can see now why people on here continue to post and help long after thier own battle is won.
-
Also:
Read this informative piece on proposed reductions. Its long, but read it anyway:
http://www.jimstrick...Reductions.html
This WAS long, and I am glad that it was because I found a huge amount of useful information
Several 38 CFR laws talked about in this article could be golden in this:
One states that the exam used to propose reduction must be as thorough as the one that diagnosed it. I had a 20 minute exam, and my hands were only glanced at. I had MONTHS of tests being physically done on my hands in order to be diagnosed. I have all the records.
Another states that any improvement has to be able to be maintianed under "ordinary" conditions of life.
The examiner misquoted me as saying I get attacks once a week rather than daily (I said I get an unbearable attack once weekly, and painful attacks daily. Anyway examiner went on for 3 paragrapghs about the measures I take to live with Raynauds. One of those was do not go outside for more than 5 minues in the winter...ever! Wear gloves inside the house. Avoid any damp weather, avoid any tempurature change at all (like sun to shade, or sun to cloudy. Only touch a cold can with a glove or doubled up napkin. And then I said, Because I have such neck problems, migraines, and Raynaud's I pretty much just stay home all the time under a blanket watching movies. DEFINATELY not ordinary conditions of life.
Is disability prone to temporary and episodic improvement? Raynauds - I could print them a book about that one.
Thanks so much- I think you may have saved my house.
-
See my post under your other topic "evil VA". I did not see this topic and answered your question on the other topic.
I found it... thank you. And thank you for all your advice. I'll be looking into it all!
-
Isnt' that 60 days to respond, not 60 days to prove? In that case, file an appeal to it, and then continue trying to get an appointment. They have to prove reductions, too.
I thought it was 60 days to state that you disagreed, but they worded it in the desicion, you are provided 60 days to provide evidence showing that this reduction is not warranted. So, I called the 1-800# and they said I would automatically lose benefits if I did not provide proof within the time given. I asked about the fact that I planned to appeal or NOD and she said that would not stop the benefits from being taken. (Tried to contact my rep, but left mess- no reponse). Sounds like this my be classic 1-800# crap. If so, it would REALLY make my day. I have not been able to breath over this.
-
I am going to focus on the headaches. It appears the C&P examiner also focused on the DDD and headaches.
The C&Pexaminers report is sufficient to issue TDIU or an extra scheduler rating of 100%. The C&P examiner said you cannot work. I was awarded SSI for a C-4 injury. I know what you are dealing with. The VA went to very creative lengths to throw out the C&P report. If you ask me they went way too far and they need to be stopped even if you have to go to the CAVC or higher.
They referred to the objective evidence in your OPT's as failing to support the examiners determination which was based on your subjective statements. The problem is that they did not identify the objective evidence they were talking about. They did the same thing to me saying there was evidence my disease was the result of post service employment. They did not cite any reports by name of the clinician, date, symptoms or diagnoses. On appeal I was awarded by a DRO. They completely fabricated the evidence my disease was the result of post service employment.
I have not seen any objective evidence that contradicts the C&P examiners report. It appears that they are referring to the fact that they decide there was no evidence of frequent prostrating events between 2004 and present. I understand you believe there is evidence of frequent prostrating events noted. If there are you should file an immediate appeal based on a factual error stating that documents in your medical records which were available at the time of the denial were not reviewed. Site the reports by date and clinician showing you told the doctors of prosrtating events. You should file for what is called a 930 review. It is faster than a reconsideration. Sharon could clarify this process. At the time you request the 930 review I would also throw in some preemptive arguments that they would not want to risk losing in ahigh court.
If they are referring to the fact that your records were silent for frequent prostratingevents between 2004 and present as objective evidence that out weights your or contradicts the subjective statements you presented to the C&P examiner,this little trick needs to appealed until someone produces a president court decision or known CFR allowing such an interpretation. I would argue that objective evidence against the claim would require a medical opinion that specifically contradicts the credibility of the subjective statements you made to the C&P examiner. Otherwise what you did not tell examiners or what the examiners failed to note in the records is nothing more than a subjective history that predates the subjective history given to the C&Pexaminer. It is not objective evidence. Baring a statements that you might have made telling doctors between 2004 and present that you headaches were mild and not prostrating there is nothing they can use to discredit the statements you made to the C&P examiner. If they want to argue that your statements to the C&P examiner can only be given weight when they are specifically collaborated by subjective statements in the OTR's rather than contradicted by the objective medical evidence or contradictory statements notedin the OTR's I would appeal this to a higher court. I would argue that the C&P examiner was aware of the entire record and if the C&P examiner thought that the silence or contradictions of the OTR's were sufficient to question your credibility he would not have written a report that your were unemployable due to your neck condition. Rather he would have stated he thought you were a faker. I have seen C&P examiners write such negative reports. It should also be noted that that the C&P exam would be credible even if the frequency and severity of the headaches had increased since your last visit to any other doctor. The C&P examiner could easily have considered recent symptoms as being indicative of not having a good prognosis. I would argue any specific reference to frequency and severity of prostrating events noted in the OTR's is not relevent. The C&P stands on its own.
Thank you for responding. I am always amazed on here when people write such long and well thought out replies to a person they don't even know. You've given me even more to think about. I hate to ask, but I have added another post about 60 days to disprove decrease, is there anyway, whenever you find the time, you could tell me what you think? Thanks again!
-
I have posted recently about several things wrong with my IU decision, it's complicated, and a confusing mess. So, I wanted to start on new topic to concentrate on a very serious part of the decision. I was diagnosed and discharged from the Army back in 2004. I did not want this and tried to avoid it, but doctors believed that my Raynauds (a circulatory disorder that causes my hands (and occasionaly my feet, nose, ears) to lose circulation, turn white, red, and sometimes grayish/purple. It is very painful and burns as the blood returns. Anyway, I was diagnosed for this by Reumatologists MANY different times between 2003- 2005. I had test after tests and all came back severe Raynauds Phenomenon. I tried many medications, some just plain did not work, others elevated my blood pressure (already service connected for hypertention, the last thing I needed was to elevate it more. And some caused severe leg cramping. (all results noted in my record by doctors). The last Rheumatology appt I had for Raynauds was back in 05. The doctor told me that we had tried everything and medication for this was not going to work for me. He told me that lifestyle change would be the best treatment. Wear gloves outside and inside if needed, limit outdoor activities in the winter to 5 minutes, shower in luke warm water rather than hot, use napkins or gloves when handling cold objects (especially metal), avoid any sudden temp changes even in the summer, and always layer my clothing. I have continued to do all these things and mention so whenever asked about Raynauds.
In 2005, my Raynauds went from temporary to permanent, and I have naver heard a thing about it since. To me, it seemed rediculous to make regular appts for this when I've already been told there is nothing they can do for me. (I guess I see now why I should have done just that regardless). My Raynauds has never changed for any extended period of time. I have the occasional week or two (in the summer) where I have less attacks, but it always returns to daily, in the winter its often several in a day). The examiner wrote everything I said about all the precautions I have to take, and all sounded good, until he wrote that attacks happen once a week. They proposed a reduce from 40% to 10%.
I have 60 days to prove otherwise or it will be gone. 2 weeks have already passed. I CANNOT get into a Rheumatologist appt. in Maine in that amount of time. I have tried and tried. I have an appointment with my primary doctor Wed. to get a referral (none will see me without one), but I've already spoken to the VA rheumatology office, and they said they'd try, but couldn't promise an appt. in that time period. Because it really does happen EVERYDAY I have thought about taking pictures of my fingers (they get very clearly discolored) on top of a dated newspaper to show the frequency, but my VSO doesn't think they'll go for that. I would get an opinion from my doctor, but he's a stubborn old school vet who doesn't think anyone should be compensated for anything...ever, especially someone my age. ( I live in Bangor Maine, we only have a couple VA docs).
Is there ANY WAY to get additional time to prove this? Its so unfair to have them give 60 days when I can't be seen in that amount of time. I can prove my Raynauds anytime and anyplace. It is so bad that if I wash my hands in cold water I get an attack. If a rheumatologist saw how easily I get an attack they would automatically know there would be no way to prevent it from happening daily. If they reduce me to this extent, I could lose my house.
-
ferris7060,
I would contact some legal representation.
You could contact the firm below if you want and see what they can offer
and/or suggest - they provide help on our SVR radio show.
They can help you NOW and from what I THINK I see, you might also have a claim for CUE
on evaluation percentage on an earlier decision.
They can rep you for no charge up front and a percentage that is limited by law if they can
get you a win and some retro pay. That is all the money you would pay them as lawyers
aren't ever entitled to any of your regular monthly compensation.
JMHO
http://www.vetlawyers.com/contact.aspx
Thanks so much for the link. I did contact a lawyer today and he agreed to take the case, but spoke to a vso also who seemed pretty pumped about the evidence and possibilies of where to go from here. I'm not used to enthusiasm from a VSO (and they are free).
I was thinking a CUE under 38 CFR 4.7 that states that your disability fits into two percentages they must go with the higher percentage. I brought it up to the VSO and he asked me to send my evidence through email, so I did. We'll see.
-
The VA is not evil. They just don't care and that is why you have to take it to them. You have to prove your case.
Evil was a strong word, that I probably should not have used. For the most part, the VA has been more than kind to me. Togus, where I usually get my claims processed has always been fair and helpful, this was sent to Buffalo, and I was floored by their obvious unwillingness to consider the evidence I submitted. I guess Togus has spoiled me. It's not that they always say yes, it's that if they say no, they have a good and valid reason for doing so. I was angry. But I will say, even though evil was a poor word choice, I think "not caring" for those you promise to care about- is pretty low. My problem is, I feel I did prove my case- quite well- they just didn't even look at it, which was made apparent by stating that no doctor has ever said I have prostrating headaches since 2004. Two Neurologists, and my PCP have, and that was right infront of them.
-
"The comment was taken from a CUE decision service connecting Migraines to DDD."
Was this a CUE decision you received???
Did they list yur SSA award as Evidence? and then mention it directly in the narrative?
"I am still in the window for a reconsideration though, so I can still submit new evidence."
Do you mean your formally requested reconsideration and the one year NOD period as not run out yet?
I had to file a NOD right at the last minute in 2007 (I had marked my calender to a year from the decision date.
I had filed for reconsideration right away but as the NOD year grew closer to being up-=although the VA had responded to my request- it was apparent to me I would be denied again and again and they hoped my NOD deadline would pass.
That claim ( actually 2 CUE claims combined due to rating errors on 2 decisions) has been pending since July 2004.
A reconsideration request does not stop the NOD clock.
It sounds like you have good evidence that they completely overlooked!
-------------------------
Wait a minute- in a past post you stated:
"Yes, I do have SSD (for DDD, migraines, and Raynauds) Got it in 2010- they went all the way back to 9/5/04, which was the day after I was medically discharged from the army."
I have to re- think what I posted-----
What is your SC% now and the breakdown of it?
What was your first VA claim for and when did you file it?
Thank you for taking the time.
This was not the CUE decision, this was an IU decison I filed in 8/10. The CUE was made in 10/08 and stated that they should have SC'd DDD and Migraines in 05' and did not.
They did refer to my SSD decision, but stated that they believe my Raynaud's 40% has improved according to my last 2 C&P exams. The first of those two stated that Raynaud's was still problematic and would limit my ability to work (not an improvement), the second stated all the things I do to avoid Raynauds attacks and basically painted a picture of my needing to take continuous steps to lead a normal life, yet he did not summarize the Raynauds at the end. The second C&P did however write down that attacks are 1 a week (even though I specifically said everyday I get attacks that change my fingers red and white, but once a week I get them so badly that my fingers turn gray. The Raynauds chart mentions nothing about severity of attacks, only frequency of attacks. Here was what they had to say about SSD (mind you NECK and MIGRANIES were listed as primary SSD factors, not Raynauds. But they insuate that they have disregarded IU do to a "proposed" Raynaud's decrease (making my highest percentage UNDER the single 40% disability needed to apply for IU. But still failed to consider the fact that I am SSD disabled without Raynauds.
Receipt of SSA information strongly support this criteria as it was a condition stated in that SSA decision, it is also service connected, and it is 40% disabling. However, as all service connected conditions needed to be examined, the previous rating, as well as this rating did not warrant that evaluation. If anything, it has been proposed to be 10% disabaling. In accordance with the VA regulations, you are provided 60 days to provide evidence showing that this reduction is not warranted which will also assist your claim for TDIU.
I plan to fight the Raynaud's hard. I seriously do have attacks everyday, have for 9 years. I am starting to take daily pictures of the clear discoloration of my hands and fingers with a dated newspaper.
I just got the decision last week, so I can still send in additional evidence.
Breakdown:
Raynauds Phenomenom 40%
Migraine Headaches associated with DDD C5&6 30%
DDD C5&6 30%
Mild Diastolic Hypertention 10%
Stress Fractures Involving Both Hips and Anterior Tibial Surfaces 10%
My first disability was Raynaud's at 40% immediately after being medically discharged due to it. Included at that time was Tension neck and headaches (later DDD and Migraines) rated 0% hypertention 0% and Stress Fractures Invovlving Both Hips and Tibial Surfaces 0%
-
"I also found this:
We have assigned a 30% evaluation based on your medical evidence showing that you have prostrating headaches 2 - 3 times monthly and at times weekly.
According to the chart THAT IS 50%. Even if I use their own words."
Prostrating is a term to get 30 percent. You are looking for the magic words to 50 percent. * Severe Economic Impact*. So if the headaches keep yopu from working then you may get 50 percent)
J
I had C&P and examiner concluded that DDD would make most jobs difficult, and then stated Migraines would preven ANY gainful employment. And, I already have SSD for SC disabilities ONLY. They knew all of this at the time of decision, however threw in there that there is NO mention of ANY prostrating headaches after 2004 were found anywhere in my medical records ???. (makes no sense because of the quote, "We have assigned a 30% evaluation based on your medical evidence showing that you have prostrating headaches 2 - 3 times monthly and at times weekly." They upped my percentage from 10% to 30% due to two Neurologists confirming "frequent" and prostrating headaches in 2009. All I had to do at that point (in my opinion) was prove that I was also unable to work- I got SSD and the C&P examiner cinfirmed that JUST FROM MIGRAINES ALONE I was unemployable). So, it seems completely contradicting to me.
-
ferris, have you submitted this evidence to VA?
What was their response?
"A review of the evidence indicates confirmation of your service connected diagnosis with your subjective reports of weekly headaches with most being prostrating. A review of your VA outpatient reports from September 7, 2004 to the present is negative for any report of your having or needing bedrest other than the October 2010 examiner's statement based on your reported complaints. There was no evidence of any prostrating migraines since 2004 other than your current exam. Based on the evidence considered, the evaluation of service connected migraine headaches assiciated with DDD of the cervical spine, which is currently 30 percent disabling, is confirmed and continued."
This was their response to my SSD decision and C&P examiners summary stating migraines prevent me from any employment. Unfortunatly I didn't notice the comment, "We have assigned a 30% evaluation based on your medical evidence showing that you have prostrating headaches 2 - 3 times monthly and at times weekly." I didn't see it until someone here on had it spoke to me like I was completely brainless, which sent me to my records to prove them wrong. (Thank you- in all seriousness)
I am still in the window for a reconsideration though, so I can still submit new evidence. The comment was taken from a CUE decision service connecting Migraines to DDD.
-
I got headaches on active duty from chemicals, jet fuel, gas, etc.. and a few year after getting out from being sick, they gave me 50% after one 3 minute exam...
I was hospitalized for stomach problems on active duty, and removed from my jobs from being sick from chemicals..
now, with pancreas disease, I have been going through appeals, exams, hospitalizations..
I found it weird, they cannot see headaches, but gave me the full amount for those, but the pancreas disease destroyed my body and is terminal, yet they fight me over that claim...
I have no idea why some people they give approve the claim for headaches, even though there is no outward sign, nothing a doctor can see... (on active duty they gave me cat scans/mri's for the headaches.. not sure what they show. maybe they showed inflammation on the scans?? I have no clue....)
I just wish they would approve the stuff I have absolutely physical proof for. Both for on active duty and 30 years later...
I have no clue what to tel people who have headaches, other than miney were during active duty... and continue to this day...
if you didn't have them on active duty, or di dnot have doctors put the notes in your SMR's, I have no idea how you can get headache claims approved..
You never can tell what they're gonna do. Sometimes I don't even think they attempt to make sense. They want to say no, so they do, and then they come up with some odd reason behind it. But, it works, because nomatter how rediculous the reason is- you're still gonna wait another year before anyone looks at it again.
-
I also found this:
We have assigned a 30% evaluation based on your medical evidence showing that you have prostrating headaches 2 - 3 times monthly and at times weekly.
According to the chart THAT IS 50%. Even if I use their own words.
It also says later in that same decision (from 2009) Extraschedular evaluation is considered, however, the findings that the case presents such an exceptional or unusual disabilty picture with such related factors as marked interference with employment or frequent periods of hospitalization as to render impractical the application of the regular schedular standards; therefore consideration of a higher evaluation than is shownby the rating schedule is not established.
Since this decision, I recieved SSD for the exact same disabilities, and a C&P stating I cannot work due to headaches. What I am asking is... What else could I possibly need for migraines? What on earth is considered "frequent" as writen on the chart, if 2-3 times a month and sometimes weekly is not? I did not know the word "frequent" is what they use for the standard for 50%, after seeing the chart- thank you for posting it- I have counted the word frequent in my paperwork, written by doctors, 8 times!
-
Diagnostic code for Raynaud's is 7117.
Yes, I do have SSD (for DDD, migraines, and Raynauds) Got it in 2010- they went all the way back to 9/5/04, which was the day after I was medically discharged from the army.
-
Okay, so looking back at what I wrote I can see why you were all under the impression that it was 2 pages of just ME saying I needed bedrest and migraines wre prostrating. That is not the case though. I've had two Neurology appointments with two different doctors. One service connected my migraines and stated they required bedrest. The second, opined that there was no change in what the last neurologist diagnosed, but added, migraines are frequent and prostrating in nature.
My PCP Progress notes show, on two different dates, that my migraine attacks require "laying down in a dark room" and "weekly attacks".
Plus, I have the C&P doctor who says my migraines prevent any gainful employment.
This comment especially bothers me. "There was no evidence of any prostrating migraines since 2004 other than your current exam." I was given 30% for "prostrating" migraines. They were decided as prostrating due to my doctors, Neurologist, and examiner's opinions. VA does not give away 30% without any proof. I proved my headaches were prostrating. I was going for 50% rather than 30%, because all notes, mine and my doctors mainly state twice weekly. How do they decide on their own that it's 2 - 3 a month?
-
Does anyone think it would be helpful to submit pictures of the Raynaud's attacks with hand laid on a newspaper showing the date of every attack? The attacks are visable, my hand gets very red with a distinct line across them where the bright red ends and my fingers from knuckle and above get bright white.
Does The Fight Never End With Va...what To Do?
in VA Disability Claims Research
Posted
I got my packet today after learning I got 100% 2 days ago. Which I am very grateful for...HOWEVER... I asked for a reconsideration on a claim started August 2010. I got the denial of that decision in August 2011. Asked for a reconsideration on that decision within 2 weeks. Sent them only old information that they should have already had as NEW evidence. They approved the claim within 2 months. NO BACKPAY WHAT SO EVER! They opened a new claim the same day I asked for a reconsideration of the crap decision. The *new* evidence I sent was an OLD decision from 2008 that listed 12 different appts. where migraines were complained of. How do they get away with this stuff? The decision maker for the reconsideration called me himself to ask what it was I wanted "reconsidered". I said the entire IU claim. And now all of a sudden its a new claim for increase. I am so tired of this battle I could scream. Also, I feel so grateful for someone finally admitting that I can't work, that I HATE to get into this again. But, give up $20,000? Everytime I called the 1-800# during this reconsideration they could all clearly see that I had opened a reconsideration not a new claim.