Jump to content

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

  • tbirds-va-claims-struggle (1).png

  • Donate Now and Keep Us Helping You

     

  • 0

Look At Part Of Evidence At A Time!

Rate this question


danang_1969

Question

Recently I appealed 7 secondary conditions plus tinnitus and a hearing loss. In the first SSOC on the hearing loss denial statements, the VA acknowledged 2 buddy letters as evidence. Those buddy letters stating I was subjected for 2 years to extreme noise without hearing protection. Their ruling was, I had a hearing loss, but was not a result of acoustical Trauma. After reviewing the evidence we feel there is no connection between your hearing loss and military service, service connection for hearing loss denied.

When they answered the NOD, they showed the Independent hearing test as evidence which said my hearing loss was more severe than the VA stated, plus it was definitely from acoustical trauma. They answered this time, with the veteran failed to show a connection between his hearing loss and military service. That's it!! If they had elaborated fully as in the first one, they would had to say after reviewing 2 buddy letters and an IMO form a certified audiologist we see no connection between the veterans hearing loss and military service. They did not show the buddy letters in the 2nd one as evidence. I guess their thinking is, if they only look at part of my evidence at a time, they can keep from looking so prejudice against the veteran. You can't beat this kinda crap with a stick.

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

That is outrageous- did they give some so-called medical rationale to rule out acoustical trauma from service? or some other etiology?

sounds like this rater didnt know a M 16 from a Hershey bar-

I would ask them to reconsider this- this is where good vet reps should step in and fight statements like this with a supporting 4138 listing the evidence, highlighting the favorable medical statements, and then asking for a more reasonable decision.

Did the buddy fully describe what acoustical trauma you had?

under acoustical trauma at the BVA- buddy statements often elaborate on just what type of situation caused the trauma.

Gun turrets, jet engines, firefights, mortars ,etc

even training exercizes could produce high levels of acousital problems.

GRADUATE ! Nov 2nd 2007 American Military University !

When thousands of Americans faced annihilation in the 1800s Chief

Osceola's response to his people, the Seminoles, was

simply "They(the US Army)have guns, but so do we."

Sameo to us -They (VA) have 38 CFR ,38 USC, and M21-1- but so do we.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

That is outrageous- did they give some so-called medical rationale to rule out acoustical trauma from service? or some other etiology?

sounds like this rater didnt know a M 16 from a Hershey bar-

I would ask them to reconsider this- this is where good vet reps should step in and fight statements like this with a supporting 4138 listing the evidence, highlighting the favorable medical statements, and then asking for a more reasonable decision.

Did the buddy fully describe what acoustical trauma you had?

under acoustical trauma at the BVA- buddy statements often elaborate on just what type of situation caused the trauma.

Gun turrets, jet engines, firefights, mortars ,etc

even training exercizes could produce high levels of acousital problems.

Bertha, one of my buddy letters is from one my old buddies from California who worked side by side with me. He gave them a complex descriptive picture of the noise we endured with no hearing protection told them he is 90% SC'd on hearing from that time frame and stated so in the letter. He also gave them his phone number if any further explaination was needed. They did not list the buddy letters or the other as evidence in this last SSOC, so I'm thinking the buddy letters were not used at all.....this time or the VA would have been listed as evidence in the last SSOC. I think I have provoked the (I got-ya ) because I filed a NOD with Denova on the PTSD they denied in 07... and it was was overturned in the Denova review. I have also forced answers out of them on iris questions when they really did not want to answer. The Regional Office and the review board have firmly convinced me they have the upper hand on well claims grounded or not if they wanta play got ya....and can do what they want and we have no recourse other than the BVA and that's not a good one. I know my case is solid and they do to.... that's why they continually try to confuse and separate the facts of me being lowballed on PTSD and also in the secondary conditions they denied.... and if given due process I would win.....but It appears, at least at this time my only recourse is the BVA and that is not a good choice with the back log. I have at this time a reconsideration request in for an increase in percentage and TDUI since I haven't worked since 03 and they are working hard to confuse it asking for evidence I ahve already submitted and they have acknowleded recieving in an iris. I going for an IMO soon before I reply and send all the evidence. I am also in the process of firing my one eye monkey DAV rep... who I have only talk to once in a year for a couple of minutes since he took my claim. If he were paying any attention to my claim,.. this stuff would not be happening. Thanks for all your help and support and being a caring person.

Danang_1969

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I just remembered you filed a Reconsideration request- WAY to go here!

Last time I checked with 800# for my claims status-they said it was still with the DRO- and I said to the rep(I have known him for 20 years via 800)

well at least it isnt in the PAP yet- and added The paper airplane stack- he laughed and said we dont do that- but added (since I rattled off why I am on remand) 'we do sometimes make mistakes'-

(tell me about it)

what gets me is the mistakes that might never get caught-

GRADUATE ! Nov 2nd 2007 American Military University !

When thousands of Americans faced annihilation in the 1800s Chief

Osceola's response to his people, the Seminoles, was

simply "They(the US Army)have guns, but so do we."

Sameo to us -They (VA) have 38 CFR ,38 USC, and M21-1- but so do we.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now


  • Tell a friend

    Love HadIt.com’s VA Disability Community Vets helping Vets since 1997? Tell a friend!
  • Recent Achievements

    • LEArmy93P earned a badge
      Dedicated
    • LtDave earned a badge
      Week One Done
    • HillTopVet earned a badge
      First Post
    • kidva went up a rank
      Contributor
    • AFguy1999 went up a rank
      Rookie
  • Our picks

    • These decisions have made a big impact on how VA disability claims are handled, giving veterans more chances to get benefits and clearing up important issues.

      Service Connection

      Frost v. Shulkin (2017)
      This case established that for secondary service connection claims, the primary service-connected disability does not need to be service-connected or diagnosed at the time the secondary condition is incurred 1. This allows veterans to potentially receive secondary service connection for conditions that developed before their primary condition was officially service-connected. 

      Saunders v. Wilkie (2018)
      The Federal Circuit ruled that pain alone, without an accompanying diagnosed condition, can constitute a disability for VA compensation purposes if it results in functional impairment 1. This overturned previous precedent that required an underlying pathology for pain to be considered a disability.

      Effective Dates

      Martinez v. McDonough (2023)
      This case dealt with the denial of an earlier effective date for a total disability rating based on individual unemployability (TDIU) 2. It addressed issues around the validity of appeal withdrawals and the consideration of cognitive impairment in such decisions.

      Rating Issues

      Continue Reading on HadIt.com
      • 1 review
    • I met with a VSO today at my VA Hospital who was very knowledgeable and very helpful.  We decided I should submit a few new claims which we did.  He told me that he didn't need copies of my military records that showed my sick call notations related to any of the claims.  He said that the VA now has entire military medical record on file and would find the record(s) in their own file.  It seemed odd to me as my service dates back to  1981 and spans 34 years through my retirement in 2015.  It sure seemed to make more sense for me to give him copies of my military medical record pages that document the injuries as I'd already had them with me.  He didn't want my copies.  Anyone have any information on this.  Much thanks in advance.  
      • 4 replies
    • Caluza Triangle defines what is necessary for service connection
      Caluza Triangle – Caluza vs Brown defined what is necessary for service connection. See COVA– CALUZA V. BROWN–TOTAL RECALL

      This has to be MEDICALLY Documented in your records:

      Current Diagnosis.   (No diagnosis, no Service Connection.)

      In-Service Event or Aggravation.
      Nexus (link- cause and effect- connection) or Doctor’s Statement close to: “The Veteran’s (current diagnosis) is at least as likely due to x Event in military service”
      • 0 reviews
    • Do the sct codes help or hurt my disability rating 
    • VA has gotten away with (mis) interpreting their  ambigious, , vague regulations, then enforcing them willy nilly never in Veterans favor.  

      They justify all this to congress by calling themselves a "pro claimant Veteran friendly organization" who grants the benefit of the doubt to Veterans.  

      This is not true, 

      Proof:  

          About 80-90 percent of Veterans are initially denied by VA, pushing us into a massive backlog of appeals, or worse, sending impoverished Veterans "to the homeless streets" because  when they cant work, they can not keep their home.  I was one of those Veterans who they denied for a bogus reason:  "Its been too long since military service".  This is bogus because its not one of the criteria for service connection, but simply made up by VA.  And, I was a homeless Vet, albeit a short time,  mostly due to the kindness of strangers and friends. 

          Hadit would not be necessary if, indeed, VA gave Veterans the benefit of the doubt, and processed our claims efficiently and paid us promptly.  The VA is broken. 

          A huge percentage (nearly 100 percent) of Veterans who do get 100 percent, do so only after lengthy appeals.  I have answered questions for thousands of Veterans, and can only name ONE person who got their benefits correct on the first Regional Office decision.  All of the rest of us pretty much had lengthy frustrating appeals, mostly having to appeal multiple multiple times like I did. 

          I wish I know how VA gets away with lying to congress about how "VA is a claimant friendly system, where the Veteran is given the benefit of the doubt".   Then how come so many Veterans are homeless, and how come 22 Veterans take their life each day?  Va likes to blame the Veterans, not their system.   
×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

Guidelines and Terms of Use