Updating Your C And P Exam

[hotcoffee2]

http://www1.va.gov/vhapublications/ViewPub....asp?pub_ID=311

i am sorry, i can't select all, copy, paste pdf documents. but for anyone that is going for a decision, you should read this. it allows the c and p to be repeated, provided the c and p is obsolete.

this applies in my case. big time. there have been two additional emgs, six additional neuro appointments. and a totally different diagnosis.

if someone could be so kind and get the url copy and pasted into this post it may be helpful.

[hotcoffee2]

i think it might be said this way. the VHA has it's handbooks. in the handbooks are the standards of care requirements written in a cogent manner. the vba uses the regs. the regs come from congress>>>>handbooks describe patient care, documentation standards, privacy rights etc. and are consistent wit JACHO (aka joint commission standards).

personally i find handbooks an easier read.

im not the horse kids.....

[MRRRR5]

just because this is a directive with a finite date, doesnt mean it will disappear forever.

You're right! If the VHA/VBA decides to amend or extend the directive, then it will receive a new drop dead date, otherwise it dies on the date stated within. That's why the date is there.

just because a vet requests new c and p doesnt mean the effective date will change.

Correct again! However, a new C&P that tells of evidence for the first time will, in fact, change the date, in the absence of previous medical records that state the same evidence. In other words, if the rater can find a way to say that it is new evidence, and it was not previously known, he will darn sure do so.

this is an important piece of information for allot of us and we don't need it added to the misinformation that sometimes abounds.

This is nothing more than a tid bit of information. It is about as meaningful as the cover page of the C&P Service Clinician's Handbook. I will post the meaningful information after I adress the remainder of your post. I will also address the misinformation comment in due time.

i got it from the horse's mouth (whom i cannot identify). there are specific guidelines for setting a new date for a claim and this ain't one of em.

If you cannot identify the horse, then there is no horse. You are not a journalist who has the legal right to protect her source. Moreover, I could care less if the horse's name is James Peake; if it's not written in Title 38 or 38 CFR, then it does not count. All VBA publications stem from Title 38. It IS the be all-end all, and what someone says does not matter in the least if it is not written as a matter of law.

this is important for me because my c and p is totally wrong, and i never received a rating (the ro said i should receive a rating based on the c and p). i want to be rated correctly.

Patti/pattik/hotcoffee/hotcoffee2,

I know that you don't think that you are the only veteran to receive a poor C&P exam. This very board is littered with such individuals. You can request a new C&P to correct the issue until your face turns blue, but they DO NOT have to give you one based solely upon your request, or what you deem important. They MAY request a new C&P for reasons prescribed in 38 CFR, and instructed in M21-1MR. It will be done, or not done, based on their reasons, and on their timeframe. Now, if you do get a new C&P, and you offer up new evidence, such as results of new medical tests, or new diagnoses, that weren't extant previously, then that is considered "new and material" evidence under the law. When a rater sees this, he MAY apply the date of such information as the earliest effective date of claim, however, he does not have to. The CFR states that the eed of a claim is the date that the claim was filed or the date that the disability manifested itself to a comensable degree, whichever is later. End of story.

You eluded to the fact that I have posted misinformation in this thread and possible others. The fact is that I applied my knowledge of the laws, regulations, and manuals, combined with common sense and a good understanding of the English language to the directive that you posted. I try my hardest to take what the VA lawyers turn out and translate it into lay phraseology for the good veterans on this board. I take offense to your allegation. The fact of the matter is I almost always back up my positions with the applicable law and regulation. I do my best to seperate my personal opinions and the facts of law. That is the key to winning any claim with the VA.

Now, I don't mean to sound harsh, but there are those who need to post information, and there are those that need to read and seek information. I am a combination of the two. I admittedly only know a fraction of what is out there. I do, however, know exactly how to obtain the information that is needed to answer almost any question that I or another vet may have. You solidly fit into the latter category. There is a reason that your claim is stagnate. You need to take a step back, resolve to learn what it will take to win, and then begin to ask the right questions and seek the proper guidance. I am not one to gain information from for a 1151 claim. There are a few on here that hold a wealth of knowledge on that very topic, though. Read there posts, and ask them questions. Then do your own searches of the laws, regs, BVA cases, and CAVC cases. Get the knowledge necessary to win your own claim prior to accusing others of posting misinformation, please.

Now, here is the exact information needed for changing a medical record in the VA system. It took me about 30 seconds to find it.:

The Freedom of Information Act, 5 USC 552, aka "The Law"

38 CFR 1.579 Amendment of Records aka "The Regulation for interpreting the Law"

45 CFR 164.526 Amendment of Protected Health Information aka "The Regulation for interpreting the Law"

VHA Handbook 1605.1 Privacy and Release of Information aka "The Manual for enacting the Regulation"

Not taking any sides here, but Rental man, you are on it and you do back your statement up with the law, regs, etc.

And I for one, value your opinion a whole lot as well as others members here who have "been there, done that" with the VA (Carlie, Pete53, T-Bird, Teac, Rockhound, Wings, John999, GuymasJim, the other John, and many others who i can't think of right now ;) )!

[rentalguy1]

i think it might be said this way. the VHA has it's handbooks. in the handbooks are the standards of care requirements written in a cogent manner. the vba uses the regs. the regs come from congress>>>>handbooks describe patient care, documentation standards, privacy rights etc. and are consistent wit JACHO (aka joint commission standards).

personally i find handbooks an easier read.

im not the horse kids.....

I'll say it one last time. Handbooks come from regs, whether in the VBA or the VHA. Without regs, you have no handbooks.

[pattrick]

This goes back to 4-15-04, need to be on top of things. I'm slowly learning.

[ausgmblr]

I'll say it one last time. Handbooks come from regs, whether in the VBA or the VHA. Without regs, you have no handbooks.

[ausgmblr]

Congress writes the Law, Veterans Administration Title 38 (38 U.S.C.)

Then the Atty.s for the agency write the Reg's telling the Public how the agency intends to administer the newly written law. (38 CFR). Then the same group writes the manuals to distribute internally to advise employees how they are to interprut the Reg's and administer the Law.

To challenge the law go to va.gov/vetapp and find court cases on your issue. usc is u.s. code and cfr is code of fed. regs. I wrote regs. and munual once for Title 16.