Jump to content
VA Disability Community via Hadit.com

Ask Your VA   Claims Questions | Read Current Posts 
Read Disability Claims Articles
 Search | View All Forums | Donate | Blogs | New Users | Rules 

  • homepage-banner-2024-2.png

  • donate-be-a-hero.png

  • 0

Smith V. Nicholson

Rate this question


vaf

Question

Has anyone heard of any new developments regarding Smith v. Nicholson ref. bilateral tinnitus ratings increased to 20%? I know the VA has initiated an administrative stay on processing any appeals for increases based on the Court of Veterans Appeals April 2005 decision for certain cases of bilateral tinnitus. Just wondering if the VA has appealed to the Federal Circuit Court and when the case will be heard.

It was news to me that the VA could just take it upon themselves not to follow the Court's directive, instead of paying as directed, and if they later prevailed in court, taking it back.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Answers 3
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters For This Question

Popular Days

Top Posters For This Question

3 answers to this question

Recommended Posts

http://www.rao-osan.com/retact/news/retarc...letter05-3.pdf-

This is the most recent update re: Smith V Nickolson in Still Serving In Korea Newsletter for Retirees and it shows nothing has changed-

I thought the DAV was going to move more on this matter.

It seems that bilateral tinnitus claims before 2003 were grandfathered in-

it just doesnt make sense to me- how could vets have bilateral tinnitus before 2003 and then other vets who file claims after 2003 dont have it ???

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest allanopie

>It seems that bilateral tinnitus claims before 2003 were grandfathered in-

Hello Berta,

my claim for bilateral tinnitus prior to 2003 was denied last spring. The Seattle VARO said the VA doesn't pay for both ears.

From what I understand, it's the lesion I have in the"eighth" crainal nerve, that has caused the bilateral tinnitus. They have a way of skinning you out of it.

They did the same thing with the testicular cancer claim. They gave 20% for the residuals of a testicular mass. They have ignored compensation requests for chronic orchalgia, orchitis, epididimitis & Special "k" award for testicular atrophy to less then one third of normal size.

I have no idea what that all adds up to, but I feel it should be more than the 30% they gave me.

Hearing loss, Testicular cancer & loss of vision are noted on my separation examination in 1971. No compensation was awarded or offered at separation. Service records show chronicity in service.

I don't expect the VA to acknowlledge the requests for compensation even exist. And if they do, I doubt it will be processed in a manner according to law. I had hoped the BVA would be able to process atleast this part & awarded it back in 2002 or so, when they started looking at my claim. But I guess it might have to go to the court before they look at evidence like a dd214, separations examinations & in service treatment records. With my luck, i'll get "Browny". He would make VA proud.

allan

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

Guidelines and Terms of Use