Vbn

[john999]

I posted at the VBN about my CUE. The heavy hitter (Cruiser) came on to tell me that any evidence in the VA's file is considered to have been reviewed even if they never mention it in your decision. I pointed out the absurdity of that since the VA could then choose to ignore any evidence they have they don't like such as SMR's. Am I nuts or something? Where is due process in this. Also this Cruiser guy said I had a whole year to appeal, so CUE is shaky. That is the point of a CUE. You can go back after a final decision to correct glaring error. Why bother to submit IMO's if the VA can just ignore them, and never refer to them in the decision?

[jbasser]

I dont even look at the VBN.

J

[bufloguy]

Whats the VBN?

[Berta]

I sure dont buy what Cruiser is selling here.

Redundant or accumulate evidence- I can see if the VA would disregard that-or evidence that really has no probative value- but everything else? Bullcrap-they have to consider it.

Redundant or accumulative evidence might be a duplicate copy of an internet pritout or a medical record already highlighted to the VA.

I made sure since I had 2 IMOS from the same doc that I reminded VA these were not in any way accumulative or redundant because they both drew out significant and different medical facts regarding the claim.

Evidence that VA would not deem probative would be maybe a buddy statemt that is not detailed enough to support a stressor or

a BVA decision or medical internet printut that cannot be considered as relevant to the specific claim.

If someone at VAs decided what wnet into shredders- they might be the same people whop decide what might or might not be relevant or -assuming what Cruiser says- they

could say they considered stuff that they never even looked at- at all-

Not all of our stuff got shredded- I bet the largest portion of claims evidence that vets sent was simply ignored-

before anyone at ROs could determine if it was relevant or not.

I say-if the evidence was relevant and they never mention it in the decision- the vet should claim they destroyed it and use the FAst Letter on shreddergate to get it considered.

The VA I can assume per what Cruiser- considered my husbands 6 page autopsy -sent 12 times and never returned as a duplicate-

but they only considered it 3 years later when a VACO doctor was stunned to find out from me that this critcal document was never included with the c file nor opined on at all by VA.

Same with Rods SSA records-

Per cruiser I guess those records were 'considered' but the VA only consider them after 3 years when a VA shrink told them too.

Bull crap _ i feel if you have probative evidence (evidence whch can almost stand on its own and fully supports your claim- then the VA has no right to NOT consider it.

I would love to have any citation from VBM that says otherwise since VA evidentiary regs are quite clear.

The problem is that we have to hit them over the head with our evidence-the BVA stated in my remand how my IMOs appeared numerous times at the RO and in the C file but were ignored in 2 SSOCS.

I will stck with VA regs on this and stay away from Cruiser.

§4.6 Evaluation of evidence.

The element of the weight to be accorded the character of the veteran’s service is but one factor entering into the considerations of the rating boards in arriving at determinations of the evaluation of disability. Every element in any way affecting the probative value to be assigned to the evidence in each individual claim must be thoroughly and conscientiously studied by each member of the rating board in the light of the established policies of the Department of Veterans Affairs to the end that decisions will be equitable and just as contemplated by the requirements of the law.

“b. Review of Evidence. Concisely cite and evaluate all evidence that is relevant and necessary to the determination. Rating decisions must evaluate all the evidence, including oral testimony given under oath and certified statements submitted by claimants, and must clearly explain why that evidence is found to be persuasive or unpersuasive. Decisions must address all pertinent evidence and all of the claimant's contentions. “

Source: September 23, 2004 M21-1, Part VI

Change 118

______________________________________________________________________________

CHAPTER I--DEPARTMENT OF VETERANS AFFAIRS

PART 3_ADJUDICATION--Table of Contents

Subpart A_Pension, Compensation, and Dependency and Indemnity

Compensation

Sec. 3.159 Department of Veterans Affairs assistance in developing

claims.

(a) Definitions. For purposes of this section, the following

definitions apply:

(1) Competent medical evidence means evidence provided by a person

who is qualified through education, training, or experience to offer

medical diagnoses, statements, or opinions. Competent medical evidence

may also mean statements conveying sound medical principles found in

medical treatises. It would also include statements contained in

authoritative writings such as medical and scientific articles and

research reports or analyses.

(2) Competent lay evidence means any evidence not requiring that the

proponent have specialized education, training, or experience. Lay

evidence is competent if it is provided by a person who has knowledge of

facts or circumstances and conveys matters that can be observed and

described by a lay person.

[john999]

Berta

You made a heavy argument. "All information in the record is considered to have been evaluated" quote Cruiser. Cruiser is an ex-VA claims examiner. Some of his information is good, but he has the "the VA is always right" problem. I just posted to get them going. If I listened to people like that I would still be at 30% and homeless. There are some smart people over at VBN, but the VA bias is awful. They are telling a guy who was rated 70% and only works part time that he has no shot at IU. The VA told the poor guy he had autism. This is an ex-military guy who know has problems, and they are telling him he is autistic. That is like saying he has a PD. Some of these things are beyond incredible. We need to surround VBN and do a hostile take over. Joking!

[Tbird]

john if you really posted "just to get them going" then please don't bring it to this board, vbn and hadit have a good working relationship and i do not want any wars between the two here. if you have a complaint about vbn take it to their board.

frankly, i'm surprised that you posted something "just to get them going" we all are volunteers with limited time and i would hope you would respect that.

Berta

You made a heavy argument. "All information in the record is considered to have been evaluated" quote Cruiser. Cruiser is an ex-VA claims examiner. Some of his information is good, but he has the "the VA is always right" problem. I just posted to get them going. If I listened to people like that I would still be at 30% and homeless. There are some smart people over at VBN, but the VA bias is awful. They are telling a guy who was rated 70% and only works part time that he has no shot at IU. The VA told the poor guy he had autism. This is an ex-military guy who know has problems, and they are telling him he is autistic. That is like saying he has a PD. Some of these things are beyond incredible. We need to surround VBN and do a hostile take over. Joking!

[Ron II]

Although Hadit is my favorite veterans' site, I spend several hours each day on VBN, primarily due to the fact that VBN has more members who are military retirees. However, they also provide excellent help to veterans.

In my opinion, one of the main differences between the two vets sites is that when a question is posed--on Hadit "everyone" replies, including myself--on VBN, VA questions are generally answered by

a small group of members. Those characteristics are neither positive nor negative.

Note to Bufloguy: VBN is Veterans Benefits Network; you can Google that name to find it if you wish.

Edited December 22, 2008 by Ron II