Can You Add A Claim To A Remand

[pacmanx1]

Just want to know if a veteran files a claim and it is denied, appealed and remanded, if the veteran is sent to new C & P exams and given new test and diagnosed with a condition that is related to the condition on remand can the vet request that that condition be added to the remand

Edited October 27, 2009 by pacmanx1

[jbasser]

A remanded claim means a claim is in the appeal process.

A new claim is not part of that particular appeal.

The RO can infer a new issue and rate it separate while processing a remand.

J

[sf_ranger]

I am 100% P+T. I was granted that 2 yrs ago. I was informed by my VSO and others that if I attempt to add additional evidence to support another claim I could be jepardizing my entire 100 P+T because my 100% would be reopened.

Is it possible because I was rated 70% PTSD. 20% wounds that gave me 80%. I applied and was awarded 20% IU that gave me the 100%? SOme told me it really doesn't make sense to open a new case just to tell all that I am over 100 without IU and we are mensa mensa without it but it really irks the heck outta me to let it ride... I have been treated like dirt and felt trashy for telling the VA my injuries for many years until I finally had to stop working due to conflicts and said "After 40 years VA, you owe me and my family".

I am still angry with 100%... What about the quality of life my wife and I missed? NO children to love because I was diagnosed 40 years ago with Toxins in my blood by my personal MD and the VA says "Troop. You are good to go". Yeah and my wife had 4 miscarrages and one was at 8 months.

Thanks for hearing me and God Blesss our Veterans and Troops

[Berta]

sf ranger-Veterans with 100 % P & T "jeopardise" their ratings every time they file for SMC benefits.

The fact that many veterans succeed in getting SMC additional comp shows that they don't consider jeopardizing what they have.

Even a VA SC rating of "0"for something -with 100% or TDIU rating already awarded - could be the disability that could eventually lead to or contribute to their death.

In order for a re-opened claim to jeopardise a vet's established rating-the VA would have to prove substantial improvement to lower it (and give the vet full appellate rights) or they could lower it due to proven fraud.

The VA could-anytime they want- re evaluate the P & T award.A vet doesnt have to re-open and claim something else for the VA to do that.

I think this VSO was just lazy or ill informed.

Say you have been diagnosed recently with DMII-and you are an AO veteran.

Without filing the claim , the DMII could lead to heart disease and cause you to expire.

Unless the in-service wounds also contributed to your death ( it is VERY hard to get PTSD on a death certificate and prove it contributed to death) the spouse would have to start at day one to receive DIC.

If the DMII contributed to your death due to a major fatal heart attack or stroke- the fact that VA rated it would help your wife as it would be on the death certificate yet already found to be SC.

[carlie]

This is in response to the issue of,

"How about at the DRO review level? Can a vet revise or add additional retro dates or related claims to a DRO review in progress? Or during the DRO hearing?"

It would apply to the BVA level also.

If something is a new issue that has not been adjudicated by the RO,

the BVA will state so and USUALLY remand the new issue back to the RO for adjudication.

Hope this helps a vet.

carlie

M21-1MR

http://www.warms.vba.va.gov/M21_1MR.html

Chapter 5 - Appeals

Section C - Decision Review Office (DRO) Review Process

12. DRO Jurisdiction and Authority

a. DRO Jurisdiction over Appellant Issues

Once the DRO assumes jurisdiction of a case, he/she works in partnership with the appellant and representative to resolve all issues covered by the NOD in accordance with the laws and facts in that particular case. The appeal remains with the DRO until it is forwarded to BVA.

The DRO has jurisdiction over a rating issue that the appellant raises during the hearing provided the issue was part of the rating decision being appealed that is the subject of the formal hearing or informal conference.

Notes: The DRO has

· de novo review jurisdiction only over appeals for benefits governed by

- 38 CFR 3, and

- 38 CFR 4

· limited jurisdiction over a rating issue raised during an informal conference or formal hearing, provided the issue was part of the rating decision that is the subject of the hearing, and

· no jurisdiction over an appeal on a rating decision made by the DRO him/herself.

13. De Novo Review

d. What May Be Reviewed

Review only those decisions that have not become final by

· appellate decision, or

· failure to timely appeal.

The review will encompass only the decision with which the appellant has expressed disagreement in the NOD.

14. Informal Conferences

Introduction

An informal conference is provided as part of the DRO appellate review process. This topic contains a definition of informal conference and information on

· the purpose of an informal conference

· when to schedule and conduct an informal conference

· where and how to conduct an informal conference

· requesting, canceling, or rescheduling an informal conference

· who may attend an informal conference

· presenting evidence during an informal conference

· the Informal Conference Report, and

· handling

- additional evidence submitted during an informal conference, and

- new issues raised during an informal conference.

i. Handling New Issues Raised During an Informal Conference

If a new issue is raised during the informal conference and a decision on that issue has not been made, refer it to the appropriate activity for development and a decision.

[sf_ranger]

sf ranger-Veterans with 100 % P & T "jeopardise" their ratings every time they file for SMC benefits.

The fact that many veterans succeed in getting SMC additional comp shows that they don't consider jeopardizing what they have.

Even a VA SC rating of "0"for something -with 100% or TDIU rating already awarded - could be the disability that could eventually lead to or contribute to their death.

In order for a re-opened claim to jeopardise a vet's established rating-the VA would have to prove substantial improvement to lower it (and give the vet full appellate rights) or they could lower it due to proven fraud.

The VA could-anytime they want- re evaluate the P & T award.A vet doesnt have to re-open and claim something else for the VA to do that.

I think this VSO was just lazy or ill informed.

Say you have been diagnosed recently with DMII-and you are an AO veteran.

Without filing the claim , the DMII could lead to heart disease and cause you to expire.

Unless the in-service wounds also contributed to your death ( it is VERY hard to get PTSD on a death certificate and prove it contributed to death) the spouse would have to start at day one to receive DIC.

If the DMII contributed to your death due to a major fatal heart attack or stroke- the fact that VA rated it would help your wife as it would be on the death certificate yet already found to be SC.

Thank you very much. I do not believe I would be jeopardizing what I already have been awarded.

For some reason I cannot get rid of the extreme anger I have and try every day and go to weekly meetings but it just comes to the surface....Darn it. I still get ticked at the way the Veterans are treated and denied for wounds they have shown to be SC. However, I am firmly committed to help my Veteran Brothers who have gone through the same mess I have receive what is rightly theirs to receive. I have a VN "bud" who was denied and treated very badly and he has one leg...Just 2 weeks ago after months of trying to get him to go to the VA Hospital for help he received 100 P+T..

It became a great day knowing he finally got relief..

[Pete53]

I was awarded 100% P&T in 1996 and a few years afterward applied for tinnitus so I could get VA Insurance. They did reopen my 100% but just made a passing remark and denied my tinnitus.

A couple of years ago I applied for SMC which was granted and there was no mention of a review of my 100%