Earlier Effective Date Question

[majrrich]

I have just been denied an earlier effective. Briefly I went to the AL VSO in Aug 2006 and filed my claim they never submitted it finally I sent another claim in direct to the VA Jan 2007 and was just granted disability back to Jan 2007 and denied the earlier date. VA said they had no record of receiving a claim before Feb 2007. I have been going over my records I have three emails I sent to IRIS Sep 2006 Oct 2006 and Dec 2006 asking about my claim. basically they said it was never received which it wasnt because of a lousy VSO.

My question does my email requesting information on my claim constitute a Informal Claim since I technically notified the VA about my claim.

I am preparing a NOD I get no response fronm the VSO about why my claim was not submitted but since I senst three emails to the VA will that help get a earlier effective date

Thanks

[broncovet]

Frank...

The late Alex Humphrey was an attorney very familiar with VA law. He posted on hadit to the effect that, if a Veteran tells his doctor that he is unemployed, that constitutes an informal claim for increase. When a Veteran communicates his desire to apply for benefits to a VA representative, such as a VA doctor, the regulations state that constitutes an informal claim for benefit increase. Alex indicated that Vets often win claims for an EED when the Vet told his doc that he was unemployed.

I personally am adding that, I can see no reason to limit this to UI benefits, that when a Veteran tells his VA doctor he has ............ condition, that would constitute an application for benefit increase for ............ condition. The regulations and court cases, to the best of my knowledge do not limit this to claims for TDIU or UI.

It is unclear whether this could be used for a NSC Veteran the first time he applied for benefits. But if the Vet had already applied for something else, that would constitute an informal claim for benefit Increase.

As long as the VA doctor WROTE DOWN your informal claim, that is, entered it into your medical records, that constitutes an informal claim for benefits. Further, Alex pointed out court cases where the Veteran is NOT required to use the word "unemployability" or "Individual Unemployability," to "Specify the benefit sought". (The regs do require the Veteran "specify the benefit sought")

There is a whole section on Alex's posts. However, unfortunately, I could not get the link to work for Alex Humphrey's posts.

I think there is a definate distinction between an application for increase, and a new application for SC benefits here. Reason: If a Vet is going to the VA, he may or may not elect to seek VA disability compensation benefits. He could well be treated for x condition, without any intent to apply for benefits. However, once he applies and tells his doc that he has a new condition, he can often win that effective date for benefits upon appeal.

Of course, the VA is going to try to "weasel out" of paying benefits. You see, the VA regurarly denies claims they should approve, because they know only a small percentage of Veterans ever appeal. So, they deny things knowing they would be overturned upon appeal. Then, the VA hires about 300 lawyers to try to find a loophole on the Vets denial.

It is a disgrace to Veterans to do it this way. It is no wonder there are so many homeless Veterans. The net effect is that the VA Regional Office can/does deny deserving Vetrans claims, then the Vet must fight a slew of 300 VA attorneys just waiting for their chance to attack a Veteran. They use all means possible, such as claiming that it was the Veterans own fault, bad discharge, didnt apply correctly, etc. etc.

I personally think the 300 or so (Office of General Counsel) VA attorneys should be "lent out" to defend Veterans on their claims, not attack Veterans.

It is simply wrong for money that is supposed to go to help Veterans being spent to pay lawyers to try to "weasel" the Veteran out of his money.

Edited June 7, 2009 by broncovet

[majrrich]

Thank you VERY Much, My son-in-law has helped with my claim I will give him this info and he will research it. Sounds like its worht a try

thanks to all

[deltaj]

Frank...

The late Alex Humphrey was an attorney very familiar with VA law. He posted on hadit to the effect that, if a Veteran tells his doctor that he is unemployed, that constitutes an informal claim for increase. When a Veteran communicates his desire to apply for benefits to a VA representative, such as a VA doctor, the regulations state that constitutes an informal claim for benefit increase. Alex indicated that Vets often win claims for an EED when the Vet told his doc that he was unemployed.

I personally am adding that, I can see no reason to limit this to UI benefits, that when a Veteran tells his VA doctor he has ............ condition, that would constitute an application for benefit increase for ............ condition. The regulations and court cases, to the best of my knowledge do not limit this to claims for TDIU or UI.

It is unclear whether this could be used for a NSC Veteran the first time he applied for benefits. But if the Vet had already applied for something else, that would constitute an informal claim for benefit Increase.

As long as the VA doctor WROTE DOWN your informal claim, that is, entered it into your medical records, that constitutes an informal claim for benefits. Further, Alex pointed out court cases where the Veteran is NOT required to use the word "unemployability" or "Individual Unemployability," to "Specify the benefit sought". (The regs do require the Veteran "specify the benefit sought")

There is a whole section on Alex's posts. However, unfortunately, I could not get the link to work for Alex Humphrey's posts.

I think there is a definate distinction between an application for increase, and a new application for SC benefits here. Reason: If a Vet is going to the VA, he may or may not elect to seek VA disability compensation benefits. He could well be treated for x condition, without any intent to apply for benefits. However, once he applies and tells his doc that he has a new condition, he can often win that effective date for benefits upon appeal.

Of course, the VA is going to try to "weasel out" of paying benefits. You see, the VA regurarly denies claims they should approve, because they know only a small percentage of Veterans ever appeal. So, they deny things knowing they would be overturned upon appeal. Then, the VA hires about 300 lawyers to try to find a loophole on the Vets denial.

It is a disgrace to Veterans to do it this way. It is no wonder there are so many homeless Veterans. The net effect is that the VA Regional Office can/does deny deserving Vetrans claims, then the Vet must fight a slew of 300 VA attorneys just waiting for their chance to attack a Veteran. They use all means possible, such as claiming that it was the Veterans own fault, bad discharge, didnt apply correctly, etc. etc.

I personally think the 300 or so (Office of General Counsel) VA attorneys should be "lent out" to defend Veterans on their claims, not attack Veterans.

It is simply wrong for money that is supposed to go to help Veterans being spent to pay lawyers to try to "weasel" the Veteran out of his money.

I'm thinking what you mean is an inferred claim for total disability individual unemployability.

[deltaj]

Thanks for the Advice. I was not aware that the diagnosis from the VA Dr. could be the informal claim. If that is the Case. I was diagnosed in July 2006 by a VA dr. and a Pvt Dr.

So if I understand you I can send a NOD citing the date I saw the VA Dr. and was diagnosed as an informal claim and then the date the VA received my formal claim Jan 2007. I have all the VA Medical Records I will start tonight

Thanks to all my VSO says he cant tell me anything because I no longer have a POA.

I think what we are discussing here is an inferred claim for total disability individual unemployability.

[poolguy11550]

The burden is still on the Veteran to inform the VBA of a claim as soon as he or she knows a claim my exist.

[Hoppy]

Going to the doctor and saying your depressed is not sufficient. However, if you tell the doctor you are depressed and you intend to seek a VA benefit for depression would be sufficient.

FINDINGS OF FACT

1. All relevant evidence necessary for an equitable

disposition of the appeal has been requested or obtained.

2. The Veteran filed his initial claim for service

connection for PTSD on 10 January 2006.

3. A 9 November 2005 VA treatment record noted the Veteran

was not then service connected for PTSD, but planned to

apply, and this record may be accepted as an informal claim, because the Veteran's January 2006 formal claim was received

within one year of the informal claim, but there is no

earlier claim for service connection for PTSD than 9 November

2005.