Confused About C&p

[JayBrown1]

A friend of mind had a C&P exam today. He told me he had claims in for his knees, shoulder, back and blood pressure, but he said when he got to his exam the examiner told him his exam was for his knees only. Does that mean that the VA had enough information on the other issues to make a decision on them? Have anyone went through anything like this?

[jbasser]

There is actually a protocol. The C&P examination guide or sheets that I see or t he computerized forms do ask about secondary conditions. If a Doctor notes the condition you have an informal claim right there.

you still have to file it. I have also viewed BVA remands about rating secondary conditions or instances called inferred claims. A claim not filed but the evidence is in the record.

[john999]

When you file for a secondary condition it is a good idea to get a medical opinion that specifically links the primary and secondary condition. You need to spell it out for them in a cause and effect manner.

[timetowinarace]

But, Time, I do have one question.

If a vet files a claim of ENTILEMENT to service connection, then lists a number of conditions and or symptomes as secondary to the condition he/she is seeking service connection for, why do you believe the Rating Specialist would request a C&P exam(s) for the conditions listed as secondary when service connection hasn't even been established yet?

For two reasons.

One. The VA is looking for any reason to deny the claim. If they can get a Doc (and often they can) to report that one of these secondary conditions (or even a seperate condition) is not secondary but is actually causing the problem or making it worse they can deny or lowball the claim. I've had that happen and it often does with depression as secondary. They say the depression is caused by something else and deny it and say that its causing much of the problems and lowball the original claim. These laws are also there to protect the VA.

Two. Each veteran only has one C-file. All claims cannot be worked seperately. They are done at the same time. Everytime a new claim is filed the file goes back to the beginning and the bottom of the pile. Previous claims quit getting worked on untill they are all caught up. This is what usually happens. Every decision I've ever gotten had ALL of the issues denied or rated on one notice. My last decision, the rater called me because they had recieved a list of symptoms/residuals and had to consider them informal claims. My main claims were ready to rate but could not be rated untill all of the claims related to it were investigated. I had to send written notice I was not claiming all my residuals as seperate claims.

Now all that said, the VA is supposed to rate ready to rate claims. But, this thread is about developing the claims file and one single claim is not ready to rate. (as far as we know) So the VA should develope all claims at the same time. Filing a new claim will allways slow down the claims proccess. Also, beware of a single decision on multiple issues. The VA can rate a ready to rate claim and close the others without notice.

Appeals are a different matter, claims are defered at times.

Disclaimer. My posts lean towards what the law says to do. I'm very aware that the VA ignores this at times. They broke the Law no less than nine times to deny my claims for years. Including the one I posted below. I beleive we should hold the VA to these laws and not be too accepting when they work outside them. If the VA is not working all conditions related to the SC condition, they will more likley deny or lowball the claim/s.

I'm not saying your wrong. In your case, it may be what the VA is doing. I don't know the complete claims history. Just that, in the way it was presented, I disagree that that is the way the VA usually does it. (protocol) I did'nt post to argue either. I personally would be concerned if all conditions relating to my SC conditions were not being developed.

Time

[jbasser]

Jay, tell your friend to be wise to the fact they did not examine the other issues. If he has a separate opinion, he may be ok, But I doubt it. Sometimes they will not even grant a C&P unless there is evidence of a claim.

Remember the old addage of Well grounded. The VCAA supposedly kicked it out but I will go on a limb and say that if a claim does not show merit ( VA OPINION at the ro) Then it may have the old automatic denial.

All Vets need to get an IMO before your claim gets this far.

The more procative a Veteran is the better off they are.

Am IMO is easy to get. Just call a SSD attorney and ask them for a Doctor they use for IME's (usually a Occupational doctor) They usually cost between 5 and 6 hundred. ( Cheaper than Bash).

Kentucky Vets if you need one, Shoot me a message.Good Luck Jay

[luvHIM]

Thanks, Time.

I appreciate you going more in depth. Yes, I am concerned that all conditions will not be considered because they are ratable on there own. But I can't do anything until I get the decision back and see what was included and what was not.

I will be able to use what you have posted to prepare, should the need arise. I am hoping that I don't have to appeal again.

I know what you said about the denial of a claim based on a condition that is listed and indicated to be the source of my continued pain/problems. The one on appeal was decided on that type of superimposing the facts by the RO.

The problem with the assertion is the fact that the two conditions named are aggravating the same anatomical region. Not even my doctors can say with certainty which condition is responsible for emitting the pain every given time. So, how a rating specialist can determine that is beyond anyone looking at my claim and C-file.

The above statements from doctors is noted throughout my VA medical records, along with the fact that the main concern of my doctors is to help me with managing the pain, irregardless of which source is exacerbated at any given time because the medicinal treatment is virtually the same either way. This is what I am standing on with regard to my appeal and just the plain fact that RO inappropriately applied the WRONG diagnostic codes in deciding my claim. We'll see. Thanks again for your input.