Do They Really Think We Are Stupid?

[JayBrown1]

I just received a decision on an appeal from 2003 from the Board of Appeals. I read it and couldn't believe what I was reading. It stated that I reported that I manage to do my activities of daily living very well, which is the biggest fabrication of the truth. Everything that I said or sent to them said the opposite even to the fact that I could not travel to my brother's funeral because of the problems that I was having with my back.

I am in the process of request the document that states that I said I am able to manage my activities of daily living very well, because that will be what I use in court.

How can they fabricate information like that and think we will not see what they are doing. Clearly this was done to help change the outcome of the decision. How can I manage the activities of my daily living when I have been taking oxtcodone 4 times a day and methadone 3 times a day and been diagnosed with depression in which I am taking medication for it.

These people never seems to amaze me. I know they will again because they are going to say that I did not appeal this decision in time. Eventhough, they mailed the decsion to an old address in March. When I appealed it was from the address I am presently living, so how did they manage to send it to an old address, you tell me!

[free_spirit_etc]

That is a very good point to make!

Sometimes when I have read the BVA decisions -- the rules seem unjust and unfair. But that is because I am reading them from the slant the BVA interpreted them to deny the claim.

And you start to get the message that 'These are the rules that Congress made to keep people from getting these benefits"

But if you read the actual rules as they are written - and read some of the Congressional history - You really see they really ARE IN FAVOR of giving Vets the benefits. That can be shown by the number of laws they have passed in response to the VA using other laws they passed in a way that doesn't favor the Vet.

But I have really noticed too - the VA are really very literal in their applying of many of the rules. I notice a lot of appeals where the appellant tries to argue that the rule should not be applied because of ____ and those arguments do not succeed at all.

Though the rules even say that "equity" can be granted -- I haven't seen that much. The BVA says that only the SECRETARY can grant that.

You know I have been reading the VBM and I find that the actual rules and regs are very favorable to vets. However, the VA ignores the official rules and wrongly denies many claims. If the vet knows the rules he/she will win in the end.

[john999]

Free

Yeah, how many times do vets really get the benefit of the doubt? If you have overwhelming evidence you get the benefit of doubt so says the VA.

[sixthscents]

John I have to agree with you. The right regulations are in place, but it seems again and again that the raters are simply disreguarding them, and denying claims based on their own opinion of their merit rather than based upon the actual evidence at hand. I actually had one say that a doctors statemet was "speculation"... when the doctor was offering their professional opinion on something... the rater had the utter gall to say, in other words that THEY knew more than the doctor.... a rater. I run into this again and again... the raters are dismissing the facts on hand, or even if they do use them they twist them to suit their own preconcieved notions...

Now not all raters are like this, there are both good and bad ones, like anything else, BUT... it seems to me that there is a top down attitude that veterans are seeking a form of welfare rather than just recompense for injuries obtained while in the defense of our country.

Theres an interesting article about the Armys intentionally deceitful and filthy disability rating process. It at military.com but I cant post thelink so you'll just have to look it up. It's worth reading though.

(sigh)... I'm sorry I'm a bit "passionate" today. I'm not feeling well and it affecting my attitude and objectivity.

[Vike17]

Jaybrown1,

You said that your claim came back from the BVA, so that means there have been a number of people that have looked at it so far and they have all came to pretty much the same conclusion. Obviously, there is something missing as far as medical evidence is concerned that has caused your claim to be further denied. You didn't say what disbility or disabilities you had on appeal.

One thing to consider is that regardless if it's a RVSR, DRO or a someone at the BVA, their jobs also entails a certain amount of judgment in assigning weight and so forth to evidence. Now, sometimes bad judgment is used as everyone knows there can be the wildest of decision made by VA. However, in your case, as I said before, there have been numerous decision makes that have looked at your claim already, and they have all pretty much came to the same conclusion. In the end, this means that ultimately there is something missing as far as medical evidence is concerned that warranted the same conclusion by all of the decision makes thus far. This could be an IMO that didn't provide for a full rational or the entire medical records hadn't been reviewed, or other medical evidence in the c-file paint a different picture to what is contended.

Maybe if you post your docket number and the year of the decision, I could take a look at it and tell you why they decided what they did.

Vike 17

Edited June 12, 2007 by Vike17

[Hoppy]

I agree with Vike, It is not a question of what you told them in letters or at a C&P. Additionally, they did not give you insight into where they got this information. There is something they think is weak about the claim. I know lots of people who are rated for back pain. I belong to a retired veterans mens club. Half the guys in the club are service connnected.

The fact that you did not go to the funeral is a very temporal statement. I told them that I spent 16 hours a day in bed and have not even considered going fishing in the last two years. If I remember right you have had the back problem a long time. Make sure the treatment records are accurate. statments you make to a C&P's examiner and statements in support of a claim pale compared to treatment notes. You need to read the treatment notes. The doctors could be putting anything in there. They could be looking a the total lenghth of time that that the current rise in symptoms has been going on. If they do not think it is long enough they won't tell you this. They will use some generic statement like "you function well in your daily activities". If you did not establish a strong history of interupted activities due to pain prior to the meds being prescribed they might think that you take the meds for depression alone and that the depression is separate from the pain. Again they will not tell you this in their logic.

There is no law that they have to believe every word a claimant say. They look at the totality of the medical evidence. If they see a flaw in the relationship and development of the medical evidence and what the claimant says they will fight the claim and not tell the veteran the real reason behind their logic. They could have a valid reason to suspect that what people are telling them does not match up or they could be in error. Either way they won't see their own mistake and know the difference and deny the claim. Pound them with medical evidence.

Everytime I have a primary visit they ask me if I am in pain and what hurts before I even see a doctor. I always tell them I have back pain. I always tell the doctor when I see her I have back pain and I am not even service connected for my back.

Edited June 13, 2007 by Hoppy

[JayBrown1]

I agree with Vike, It is not a question of what you told them in letters or at a C&P. Additionally, they did not give you insight into where they got this information. There is something they think is weak about the claim. I know lots of people who are rated for back pain. I belong to a retired veterans mens club. Half the guys in the club are service connnected.

The fact that you did not go to the funeral is a very temporal statement. I told them that I spent 16 hours a day in bed and have not even considered going fishing in the last two years. If I remember right you have had the back problem a long time. Make sure the treatment records are accurate. statments you make to a C&P's examiner and statements in support of a claim pale compared to treatment notes. You need to read the treatment notes. The doctors could be putting anything in there. They could be looking a the total lenghth of time that that the current rise in symptoms has been going on. If they do not think it is long enough they won't tell you this. They will use some generic statement like "you function well in your daily activities". If you did not establish a strong history of interupted activities due to pain prior to the meds being prescribed they might think that you take the meds for depression alone and that the depression is separate from the pain. Again they will not tell you this in their logic.

There is no law that they have to believe every word a claimant say. They look at the totality of the medical evidence. If they see a flaw in the relationship and development of the medical evidence and what the claimant says they will fight the claim and not tell the veteran the real reason behind their logic. They could have a valid reason to suspect that what people are telling them does not match up or they could be in error. Either way they won't see their own mistake and know the difference and deny the claim. Pound them with medical evidence.

Everytime I have a primary visit they ask me if I am in pain and what hurts before I even see a doctor. I always tell them I have back pain. I always tell the doctor when I see her I have back pain and I am not even service connected for my back.

My C&P examination showed that I have periphal neuropathy with sensory loss in all extremities.