Amc Denial Letter Arrived.

[Josephine]

Well all you good folks,

After the run around this morning, James had a Kathy call me, said the Director was who he wanted to assist me. Shut me up maybe?

Anyway, we discussed my claim and she said that it was a denial and I said O.K.

Let me ask you a question about the last Opinion that came from the VAMC.

I ask her to bring it up on her computer.

She did and I said look under Dr. Lxxxxx name do you see the words Examined Nov. 16, 2007 and she said yes, I said now look at the next line and it says examination results.

I ask her what examination for I haven't had one in almost three years.

She said " What". I advice you to waiver your 60 days and get this over the the BVA.

I thought, what the heck, why not. I have had it with the mess anyway. Believe it or not, she walked that darn file over to the BVA.

It is ready for processing first thing Monday Morning.

Anyway, shortly the letter of denial came.

Talk about Benefit of the Doubt? I haven't figured this one out yet. Dr. Muller who did the first C&P was never mentioned and neither was Dr. Cxxxxx.

They stated my medical records from 1965 - 1979 were Illegible. Don't how that dumb lady shrink read them and they couldn't.

She had down every drug that I have took.

Dr. Payne was not a Psychiatrist and could give him some weight.

DECISION Entitlement to service connection for an acquired psychiatric disorder, to include anxiety and depression remains denied.

REASONS AND BASES

Blah, Blah, Blah,

The expanded record was reviewed twice by the board of examining Psychiatrist.

They have determined that no change is warranted in the previous opinion that your condition predates your service and underwent no increase in severity beyond its' natural progress.

The VA. examiners have determined that your " disability " manifested in service was an immature personality.

After reviewing the evidence in its totality, we have concluded that the most current, credible diagnosis is the one rendered by the board of Psychiatrist.

Personality Disorder, not otherwise specified, with borderline, histrionic and dependent traits.

The Anxiety Disoder noted in the medical records was not diagnosed in service, and not noted in legible treatment records prior to 1979.

Denied.

Betty

Edited December 14, 2007 by Josephine

[Josephine]

Betty

Good luck and God's speed!

Thanks a bunch, John,

Betty

[Berta]

Josephine- I feel if you can prove the nexus- the drowning incident- this claim would turn around-this would have been sctuttlebutt on the base,for buddy statements - as well as there were two wtnesses- the women who performed CPR and of course the Navy EMS service personnel and hospital she was taken too-there must be a record somewhere of this event-

Why I always bring this up-is because this event could certainly cause anyone to have anxiety and depression,

and with a proven nexus-in my opinion- it would then be easier to get a good independent medical opinion to overcome the VA ones.

I admire the fact that you are willing to continue the fight-

I have seen many cases at the BVA where the vet had a PD and then proved an inservice stressor and the PD diagnosis was changed.

Now many of these new Traq vets are going through the same thing-

and if they were exposed to life altering events-I only hope they fight back the PD and also can prove exactly what happened to them in service to get a better diagnosis.

I just heard from a vet friend- it took him 12 years but he finally got his SC.

It can be done-I saw this as a very important event to the BVA-because it would show that anyone who experienced soething like this would definitely have problems tht have nothing to do with a personality disorder -in my opinion-

DONT give up- I admire that you are willing to go the whole route-and hopefully this will not be at the BVA long- and you will know the next step to take.

As I understand it- if the CAVC becomes the only recourse-the judges there base their review only on what they get from the BVA -and cannot except more evidence.

If I am wrong there please correct me -someone.

Josephine you are more valuable as a person and a veteran than some dumb piece of paper from the VA.

I just wish that none of you- who had Honorable service- have to prove and prove everything-as if you werent honorable- when you all really are.

Berta

[hurryupnwait]

John,

With the Expediated claim, I was told by the BVA . I should be out within two months at latest.

The first time around around, I was there less than the two months.

Always,

Betty

I was told by Dean that denials go to the BVA for review for 60 days or less. During this time you can send in additional evidence, i. e. an IMO.

This is my read on this.

Favorable C&P exam

Unfavorable clarification of the above exam by Dr.L, same as they did to me.

Those cancel each other out.

Second clarification is what tipped the scale to unfavorable.

I think an IMO would bring it back to favorable, but the IMO would have to address the favorable C&P exam and the first and second clarifications.

Do not give up!

Happy Trails

Paul

[cloudcroft]

Josephine,

For the BVA, be sure to list EVERY item of evidence you want the BVA judge to look at, and state the VARO apparently has ignored some or all of it.

Also you should clarify/simplify your argument to state briefly exactly WHAT you are trying to accomplish and WHY the BVA should grant your claim (list reasons). Keep this statement VERY SIMPLE, clearly/logically stated and confine it to ONE PAGE if at all possibe...sort of a "cover-letter" if you will, your claim in a nutshell...something the BVA judge can read quickly and get a grasp of your claim and see the items of evidence listed without any confusion, complicated details, etc.. Save those details for later.

Send this in ASAP and ask that it be put "on top of your claims folder" so it's right there for the judge to read first.

As I said, save the details for another statement (and/or argue them in-person if you do a BVA video hearing), but for NOW just write up something simple for the BVA to see, where you are going with this and what evidence supports you and that said evidence should result in grant of your claim by a preponderance of the evidence (especially since the VARO seems to have no concrete evidence on its side, just "appears to be" and such...as was discussed in your other thread re: Presumption of Soundness).

But you should add in your statement that even if the VARO's "appears to be" evidence is accepted by the BVA, YOUR evidence is still more concrete than the VARO'S and STILL should tip the claim in your favor...but if it does not, it surely SHOULD put the evidence in a state of equipoise and you ask that Reasonable Doubt/Benefit of Doubt be applied.

Either of these -- preponderance or equipoise -- would get you a win. As I tell people, vets have a 66% chance of winning their claim. Those are good odds. But even BVA Remands back to VARO often turn into a win.

I am optimistic that the BVA -- and a very fresh set of eyes and mind -- will look at ALL your evidence (doctors' letters especially) and grant your claim, either seeing a preponderance of the eidence on your side or, the evidence being in a state of equipoise.

I say this in part because it took the BVA to grant my claim when the VARO would not and denied me for most of 4 years. As it turned out at the BVA, the VARO COULD have ruled the very same way 3 years earlier but it didn't, so it took the BVA to order the VARO to do what it should have done.

I am thinking the BVA will do the same for you.

Good luck,

-- John D.

Edited December 15, 2007 by cloudcroft

[Josephine]

Josephine,

For the BVA, be sure to list EVERY item of evidence you want the BVA judge to look at, and state the VARO apparently has ignored some or all of it.

Also you should clarify/simplify your argument to state briefly exactly WHAT you are trying to accomplish and WHY the BVA should grant your claim (list reasons). Keep this statement VERY SIMPLE, clearly/logically stated and confine it to ONE PAGE if at all possibe...sort of a "cover-letter" if you will, your claim in a nutshell...something the BVA judge can read quickly and get a grasp of your claim and see the items of evidence listed without any confusion, complicated details, etc.. Save those details for later.

Send this in ASAP and ask that it be put "on top of your claims folder" so it's right there for the judge to read first.

As I said, save the details for another statement (and/or argue them in-person if you do a BVA video hearing), but for NOW just write up something simple for the BVA to see, where you are going with this and what evidence supports you and that said evidence should result in grant of your claim by a preponderance of the evidence (especially since the VARO seems to have no concrete evidence on its side, just "appears to be" and such...as was discussed in your other thread re: Presumption of Soundness).

But you should add in your statement that even if the VARO's "appears to be" evidence is accepted by the BVA, YOUR evidence is still more concrete than the VARO'S and STILL should tip the claim in your favor...but if it does not, it surely SHOULD put the evidence in a state of equipoise and you ask that Reasonable Doubt/Benefit of Doubt be applied.

Either of these -- preponderance or equipoise -- would get you a win. As I tell people, vets have a 66% chance of winning their claim. Those are good odds. But even BVA Remands back to VARO often turn into a win.

I am optimistic that the BVA -- and a very fresh set of eyes and mind -- will look at ALL your evidence (doctors' letters especially) and grant your claim, either seeing a preponderance of the eidence on your side or, the evidence being in a state of equipoise.

I say this in part because it took the BVA to grant my claim when the VARO would not and denied me for most of 4 years. As it turned out at the BVA, the VARO COULD have ruled the very same way 3 years earlier but it didn't, so it took the BVA to order the VARO to do what it should have done.

I am thinking the BVA will do the same for you.

Good luck,

-- John D.

John D,

When Kathy called and she reviewed my denial decision, she said it would be in my best interest to get my claims file back to the BVA as fast as possible. I waivered the 60 days.

I have no ideal of her positon, but I do know that she was not a Coach. I ask her her position and she said, the Director knew that she would take good care of me.

She wrote things down as we spoke and she mentioned evidence, never reviewed by the rater.

She said, my denial letter had already been mailed and she couldn't take it back to rating.

I told her I had no more to send and she told me she would walk it to them.

Sure enough she did and it has been logged in at the BVA and assigned to someone.

I really have no more to add, as I had already sent the AMC a letter showing them how the DRO set out to deny me from the minute I turned in the Psychiatric Records never acquired by the VA.

It is very obvious to me. Why would the DRO sent me a Form - 9 to go to the BVA on a Preliminary Decision.

My form -9 has absolutely nothing to do with " an acquired psychiatric disorder and I had never had my first C&P.

The DRO opened up the claim for the Acquired Psychiatric Disorder with information that he used to deny me for anxiety with depression.

I turned in copies of the Psychiatric Records to the VA. March 2004 and the SOC was dated Oct. 7, 2004.

Thanks and always Appreciate,

Betty

Edited December 15, 2007 by Josephine

[cloudcroft]

Sorry...I haven't been able to follow your claim clearly enough to understand where you're at right now.

Hope things turn out well for you in the end.

-- John D.