tinnitus Question On Informal Claim From 1978 C&p

[carlie]

This is a C&P examination done four months after separation in 1978.

(Claimants having C&P's now should get a good laugh

at C&P's from the 1970's.)

Question :

Would Tinnitus alleged be considered an informal claim for Tinnitus,being that it is noted on the C&P examination.

FYI - this C&P was ordered as the result of a claim for Otitis Media and Hearing Loss.

Also - I believe the reg for Tinnitus (at the time of this 1978 C&P) read something close to

Tinnitus had to be the result of a head injury.

Also - this C&P examiner stated that I was taking Parafon Forte and that this RX

is an anti-depressant. Parafon Forte was RX'd to me for neck and back muscle spasms,

another doctor has written that Parafon Forte has never been used for an anti-depressant.

Thanks,

carlie

Edited September 9, 2009 by carlie

[lowe124]

Here is a portion of a BVA decision which deals with the question:

The veteran argues that an earlier effective date is

warranted for his left ear tinnitus because he did not have

this condition prior to service and was service-connected for

hearing loss of the left ear with the effective date of

September 10, 1993. The veteran also contends the notation

of unilateral tinnitus of the left ear in the October 1993 VA

examination supports his contentions, implying that VA should

have interpreted the examination as a claim for service

connection. As such, he maintains that the effective date of

service connection for the tinnitus should be retroactive to

the hearing loss effective date of September 10, 1993.

The basic facts are not in dispute. As the RO noted, the

veteran's initial formal or informal application for service

connection for left ear tinnitus was filed with VA on

September 30, 2005, and indeed, the veteran does not contend

otherwise.

Unless specifically provided otherwise in the statute, the

effective date of an award based on an original claim for

compensation benefits shall be the date of receipt of the

claim or the date entitlement arose, whichever is later.

38 U.S.C.A. § 5110(a); 38 C.F.R. § 3.400. The effective date

of an award of disability compensation shall be the day

following separation from service or the date entitlement

arose if the claim is received within one year of separation,

otherwise the date of claim or the date entitlement arose,

whichever is later. 38 U.S.C.A. § 5110(:D; 38 C.F.R.

§ 3.400(B)(2).

A specific claim in the form prescribed by the Secretary must

be filed in order for benefits to be paid or furnished to any

individual under the laws administered by VA. 38 U.S.C.A.

§ 5101(a); 38 C.F.R. § 3.151(a). The term "claim" or

"application" means a formal or informal communication in

writing requesting a determination of entitlement or

evidencing a belief in entitlement to a benefit. 38 C.F.R.

§ 3.1(p).

Any communication or action indicating an intent to apply for

one or more benefits under the laws administered by VA, from

a veteran or his representative, may be considered an

informal claim. Such informal claim must identify the

benefit sought. Upon receipt of an informal claim, if a

formal claim has not been filed, an application form will be

forwarded to the claimant for execution. If received within

one year from the date it was sent to the veteran, it will be

considered filed as of the date of receipt of the informal

claim. 38 C.F.R. § 3.155.

Here, the RO granted service connection for the left ear and

assigned a 10 percent evaluation, effective September 30,

2005, the date the veteran's original claim of service

connection for tinnitus was filed with VA. An effective date

of an award of service connection is not based on the

earliest medical evidence showing a causal connection as the

veteran contended through his representative, but on the date

that the application upon which service connection was

eventually awarded was filed with VA. Lalonde v. West, 12

Vet. App. 377, 382 (1999).

This is a C&P examination done four months after separation in 1978.

(Claimants having C&P's now should get a good laugh

at C&P's from the 1970's.)

Question :

Would Tinnitus alleged be considered an informal claim for Tinnitus,being that it is noted on the C&P examination.

FYI - this C&P was ordered as the result of a claim for Otitis Media and Hearing Loss.

Also - I believe the reg for Tinnitus (at the time of this 1978 C&P) read something close to

Tinnitus had to be the result of a head injury.

Also - this C&P examiner stated that I was taking Parafon Forte and that this RX

is an anti-depressant. Parafon Forte was RX'd to me for neck and back muscle spasms,

another doctor has written that Parafon Forte has never been used for an anti-depressant.

Thanks,

carlie