Eed Cue's

[carlie]

These are links to threads that contain past BVA Cues that I have posted.

I think most of these pertain to EED.

I hope these help one of my hadit buddies.

carlie

http://www.hadit.com/forums/index.php?show...&#entry3483 http://www.hadit.com/forums/index.php?show...&#entry3487 http://www.hadit.com/forums/index.php?show...&#entry3490 http://www.hadit.com/forums/index.php?show...&#entry9083 http://www.hadit.com/forums/index.php?show...&#entry9140

[vaf]

Two thoughts occur to me on your post, Berta:

1) At least to me, it was clear your POA did not deserve the benefit of the doubt, and I came to that opinion a very long time ago. I often wondered why you bothered with them at all. I think I even asked that question of you at one time. I know they can track claims and such, but it hardly seemed a worthwhile tradeoff for the damage they did to you. They did you much more harm than good, and I never saw anything constructive coming of that. It seemed that your dealings with them were as adversarial as with the VARO, and I wondered why you continued to bother with them once you had their number, so to speak.

2) The reason they are not openly cognizant or concerned about your ability to bury them professionally (if one really wants to look at them as professionals at all), I believe, is because they think they are untouchable, bullet-proof, and unaccountable for their actions. Will anyone hold them personally responsible for their ineptness and outright dishonesty? Will you be able to sue them personally, and get to their wallets? That's the only thing that matters, unfortunately, since they obviously take no pride at all in their ability to help disabled veterans and their families, and probably don't care one way or the other about public knowledge of their poor performance and lack of character.

Just my thoughts. I hope you can get to them in a way that really registers, both with them personally and the NY State VA Affairs Office as well.

[Berta]

Thanks VAF-why did I stay so long- I knew one of them for over 20 years- he was former USAF Intell- a linquist like my daughter was for the AF-

the other one was also trying to become a personal friend of mine-

another reason- I can quickly forgive an error and then go forward-

they had opportunity all along to really correct their errors- I thought they would-and gave them many chances to do that-

also for the 7 years my daughter served she had to pay NYS taxes on her income as I have to do also-and of course she didnt live in NY while she was in the mil-

our taxes pay the salaries of their reps-

also some of their reps do very good claim work- they arent all dopes-

and then again I feel that a POA does not win a claim-the medical evidence does-

and in spite of their screw ups my evidence would prevail- it never reached the VA for years somehow-

I allowed them to either redeem themselves and help me or just keep digging their own graves-so to speak-

I was able to satisfy by documentation the conditions within Sec 14.833 of 38 USC and have already taked to Gen Counsel as to that- and I have a very valid complaint the OGC will look into.

As soon as I graduate in 2 weeks I will see my attorney for any potential cause of action I might have against them.

I have been staying with them hoping they would help me but also (I go to a military school and learned plenty there)I also prepared a flank attack by- for 4 1/2 years- accumulating evidence against them.

I was not the sole claimant they screwed. There are plenty of vets they deal with- my complaint named one other vet I am witness to who they intimidated and I know they messed up other vets claims too- that is all documented in my complaint to the OGC.

It is the principles of warfare- no one wants to engage in a battle but if that looks likely -you have to prepare a very ample weapons cache, and assess the enemys intelligence and communication ability, before you even develop the tactical plan of maneuver for the first attack.

I will succeed in getting this all resolved thanks to the USMC instruction I got at the American Military University for the past 4 years.

Edited October 14, 2007 by Berta

[vaf]

I'm appalled at the way your acquaintance of 20 years and the other wannabe friend abused your trust in them. With friends like that, who needs enemies... It doesn't sound, however, like you were all that surprised, and by preparing for this for 4 and a half years, your expectations of them must have sunk to increasingly lower depths during that entire period. All this following the VA causing the death of your husband, and your having to fight them to admit it. You've got guts, lady, and as the wife of a disabled veteran, I keep you in mind every time the VA hits us below the belt with something that we've got to answer...

How did going out of their way to deny you your due process benefit them? Was it bonus money in their pocket? Some kind of accolade they received for preventing you from getting compensation, as if you were on some kind of VSO hit list -- resentment over the fact that you knew light years more than they did about the law?

On behalf of my disabled veteran husband and our family, I hope you seek personal damages from all of them and put them on the street.

[Berta]

Thanks for your understanding-

this is my point too- this state has a lot of men and women serving today in Iraq and Afganistan- if they come back to NY they too could hook up with this POA-

As Dr. Phil says- "past behavior predicts future behavior"-I have no doubt they already screwed up some new veterans claims.

I am not at all worried about my VA claims-and better off now as the DRO has to deal with me and not them-in mu behalf.

I am concerned about any NY veteran or widow that acquires them as their POA.

I believe they do have some very good reps across the state-

but this vet org is almost a dynasty- and the director is appointed by the Governor I believe-

and although the Govs liason said my 2006 complaintto the Governor was "discussed" at a meeting- it might have just been laughed at.

I used to donate the VBM to the local office and only one rep there ever even looked at it.I cannot even think of coming here to give claims advise without a current copy of the VBM.

These boys needed a thump call.

I sent the OGC hard copy proof of their incompetenece.

[Pete53]

The idea of Volunteers fighting for claims against the VA is absolutely unsound. Finally Veterans have obtained some relief by allowing them to be represented by legal counsel. The present system is a charade and many of the so called Volunteers Service Officers are paid by Organizations that raise money to fund their organizations. The VA usually provides space and access

Many of the Service Officers are inadequately trained and feel that whatever answer they give a client is ok cause after all they are doing it for free. So they take a break and go down and socialize with the VA people who are screwing the Veterans.

If the VA wanted to be fair they would attempt a plan based on Social Security and actually review a Veterans claim and records and look for the benefits that were earned.

A few years ago a VSO told my brother that he would never get a Pension but we filed anyway provided a Medical Opinion and a Notarized Declaration that although married he did not live with his wife nor had he for 10 years. He was awarded a Pension in about 3 months.

Most Veterans who seek the help of a VSO are bewildered in financial trouble and Medical Problems and this system preys on them.

[Electronic Tech]

Elec,

If you were granted SC for Tinnitus (was it granted at 0 or 10 %) just three months ago,

I suggest you file a Notice of Disagreement with the effective date and clearly show in your NOD

the legal reason or reason's of entitlement to the EED. I would not let any more time drag by.

It might help you to study the Reasons and Bases section of the Rating Decision that granted your Tinnitus as SC'd. Figure out why VA finally at this point, admits you even had a claim for Tinnitus,

and exactly what evidence was used to produce this grant. Was that evidence already of record,

was the Tinnitus SC'd from cumulative evidence or new and material evidence ?

jmho,

carlie

Hi Carliee,

Sorry for any delay in responding, I've not been on line much as I've been moved to the grave yard shift.

Anyway, here is the text from my rating:

Please let me know what you think.

INTRODUCTION

The records reflect that you are a veteran of the Vietnam Era. You served in the Army from October 18, 1964 to August 29, 1967. We received a request to reopen a previous claim on December 22, 2006. Based on a review of the evidence listed below, we have made the following decisions on your claim.

DECISION

Veterans Claims Act of 2000 (VCAA) dated March 15, 2007

VA Audiological Examination, VA Medical Center, Reno, dated June 27, 2007 .Prior VA Rating Decision and the information it contains therein dated November 11, 2006

REASONS FOR DECISION 1. Service connection for tinnitus.

Service connection for tinnitus has been established as directly related to military service. A medical note dated 1970 reports occasional ringing in both ears. Military noise exposure is reported from working on the flight line and post military noise exposure is reported as an orderly for 1.5 years and post office computer work for 10 years. Recreational noise exposure is reported from using power tools. High frequency hearing loss was noted from audio grams during military service. It is the examiners opinion that your tinnitus is more than likely caused by or a result of military noise exposure.

An evaluation of 10 percent is assigned from June 21,2006 which is the date we received your original claim for service connection for tinnitus. An evaluation of 10 percent is granted for recurrent tinnitus. Please note that a 10 percent evaluation for tinnitus is the highest evaluation for tinnitus in the current VA schedule of ratings.

2. Evaluation of bilateral hearing loss currentlv evaluated as 0 oercent disabling

The evaluation of bilateral hearing loss is continued as 0 percent disabling. {38 CFR 3.321(a); 38 CFR 3.321((1)}

Examination findings show the left ear with 96 percent speech discrimination. Decibel (dB) loss at the puretone threshold of 1000 Hertz (Hz) is 20, with a 65 dB loss at 2000 Hz, a 70 dB loss at 3000 Hz, and a 85 dB loss at 4000 Hz. The average decibel loss is 60 in the left ear. From Table VI of38 CFR 4.85, Roman Numeral II is derived for the left ear. This is determined by intersecting the percent of speech discrimination row with the puretone threshold average column. The left ear is considered the poorer ear for 38 CFR 4.85's Table VII. The right ear shows the percent of speech discrimination is 96. Decibel loss (dB) at 1000 Hertz is 20 dB, with a 40 dB loss at 2000, a 70 dB loss at 3000, and a 85 dB loss at 4000.

The average decibel loss for the right ear is 54. From Table VI of 38 CFR 4.85, Roman Numeral I is determined for the right ear. This is determined by intersecting the percent of speech discrimination row with the puretone threshold average column. A 0 percent evaluation is derived from Table VII of 38 CFR 4.85 by intersecting row I, the better ear, with column II, the poorer ear.

An evaluation of 0 percent is assigned from November 3, 1969. The evaluation for hearing loss is based on objective testing. Higher evaluations are assigned for more severe hearing impairment.

REFERENCES:

Title 38 of the Code of Federal Regulations, Pensions, Bonuses and Veterans' Relief contains the regulations of the Department of Veterans Affairs which govern entitlement to all veteran benefits. For additional information regarding applicable laws and regulations, please consult your local library, or visit us at our web site, www.va.gov.

I have always filed Tinnitus and hearing loss!

The Tinnitus part of my claim has gone mostly ignored in 1967 and 1992 as well.

Suggestions?

Elect