The "dirty Dozen"

[broncovet]

The VA has at least a dozen UNDERHANDED ways they deny claims, please add yours to the list:

1. The Veteran never applies..they make it hard for the Veteran to even know he is eligible for benefits.

2. Shredding the Veterans claim or evidence is effective at denying.

3. Ignore the claim, or parts of the claim and secretly deny it. (We dont have record of your claim for.......)

4. Delay the claim indefinately until you die or give up.

5. "Award" you zero %, which is just a back door denial.

6. "Horn swaggle you" by asking for multiple C&P exams to doc shop and deny you by finding one doc in a dozen who will give them the opinion they want, and cite that opinion in their denial. Or, they can just send you for a C&P with a doc that they know will give them evidence to deny.

7. Issue you a letter of denial..even if you have good evidence.

8. They can deny you, then when you appeal, they can deny your appeal by "interpreting" your NOD as something else, like a claim for benefits.

9. "Farm out" your denial by sending your claim to multiple Regional offices until it gets lost. Then they can blame other RO's for loosing your claim file.

10. Even if your appeal makes it through the system, the RO has to implement the BVA or CVAC decision and they Fail to implement the appeal

11. "low balling" your claim, and then use the "fuzzy math" to pay you even less.

12. "Fake dates," for example, by saying you appealed past the one year period when you sent the NOD in and they shredded it.

Please add your methods of how the VA denied you.

Edited March 6, 2009 by broncovet

[carlie]

I am very much in agreement that a grant of service connection

is a very positive thing for a veteran.

Even if it's at zero percent, this provides the claimant the medical care

that they really may be in desperate need of, with no co-pays for

the illness, injury or disease and medications and treatment for the disabling condition.

As soon as they have Medical Evidence of an increase of the disability

they can put in for an increase.

jmho,

carlie

[MRRRR5]

Want me to tell you why the examiner was "instructed" not to look at your secondary problems... Think I'll admit that on here? That they purposely don't look? That we "instruct" them in not doing so? OK, that's fair. I'll tell you.

Did you say that you are S/C for your feet? Tell me the exact things that you claimed (everything), and I will tell you something that I guess is not common knowledge on here. Maybe it is, but from what I read and see, it's not.

Another way of denying in my opinion...I notice Meddac put the word "instructed" in quotation, which would lead me to believe that the Rater know that this will result in a denial...

Edited March 7, 2009 by MRRRR5

[Meddac]

Another way of denying in my opinion...I notice Meddac put the word "instructed" in quotation, which would lead me to believe that the Rater know that this will result in a denial...

I put "instructed" in quotation because Jayg said that the examiner was "specifically instructed" not to examine his other conditions. I was quoting that part of what he said. I know for a near 100% fact that the examiner was not "instructed" to neglect other conditions by the rater.

I'm not gonna dance circles around those of you on this forum. I will shoot you straight. You may not like it sometimes, but you would rather have it laid out for you rather than "talked around", right?

We shall await his reply.

Thanks for the input, Carlie. It is impossible for me to see how getting the care you might need for free is a denial. It would only lead me to believe that money is the single root issue of a claim. I pray that it is not.

[Pete53]

If a Doc is willing to lie or exaggerate a medical opinion to help a Veteran win a claim than they should be punished and probably lose their license to practice medicine.

When I first applied for Disability I had the opposite problem as Docs would not write a helpful opinion cause they were afraid to contradict and existing medical opinion. I guess all the Doctor's for hire may be a stepchild for the VA you are guilty of instructing or whatever you call it.

[deltaj]

How about this one, as it pertains to my appeal.

Misinterpretation of a condition. When the VA misinterprets a condition, they give you a C&P exam for a condition in which you do not have. They then base their decision completely off of this incorrect C&P exam. Even if you can get them to change the condition to the correct one, on subsequent appeals they still base their decision off of a C&P exam for the other condition that they had you rated under.

I don't know how many other people this has happened to, but one is enough.

How about this technique by V.A.? Basing a rating decision on an inadequate examination in which a V.A. examiner did not have access to a veteran's file during examination. That is what happened to my husband in a July 1990 rating decision and V.A. gave him 50% and then following a hearing gave him 70%. In 1992 they denied him an increase and he could not afford to buy the house he built for his ex wife which was ordered sold as a result of his divorce. It was three years after that 1990 decision before he reached 100% P & T. In 1995 they received service medical records from the veteran's Navy service they claimed they had never before received.

[Wings]

x

x

x

Kick and Recommend this post! ~Wings