Knock Me Over With A Feather

[johnjjr]

I posted on wed. I was unsure about filing a NOD on my Jan '09 decision. Well, I did. Hand delivered the papers to the RO wed. afternoon,got a signature and came home. 150 miles round trip but worth it. Out of curiosity, I called the 800 # this morning at 11:15 AM to see if it was in the system yet.I was told that this morning a DRO had requested a hearing on my NOD. I couldn't believe it, so I called again and was told the exact same thing. I was told on the second call that it will be after the first of the year before a hearing can be scheduled. Talk about the speed of light. I didn't know the VA could move so fast.

Do you think there is a legit reason for this or am I just being shuffled to meet someone's quota?

[Berta]

John- my PM stuff is closed-

I will try to email you-

I usually don't ever deal with email from hadit because I get dozens of them a day on veterans issues and last night I was called late by an advocate who wondered why I didn't respond to their important news on another vets legislative issue I am involved in-

the emails can become overwhelming

I dont use the phone much either-

I think your case could help other vets who come to hadit-

VA says in the SOC that your diabetes was diagnosed in OCt 2007.

What the dopes didnt say is that in ER visit on 2001 and subsequent GGT test you presented the glucose values indicating DMII.Period. You had DMII in 2001.The ADA says that not me.

They completely manipulated the C & P you got in 2007 that clearly states "The onset of coronary disease is after the diagnosis of diabetes."

This C & P doc could clearly interpret the 2001 high glucose readings correctly.

and he/she added: "as likely as not a result of diabetes" meaning your heart disease.

The VARO clearly screwed up here BIG time-and this is indicative of the way they continual screw AO veterans.

I assume but could be wrong- were the glucose tests in 2001 done at a VAMC ?

Is Winchester a VA hosp?

What treatment for your full blown diabetes did the VA provide to you from 2001 (or from their knowledge of these glucose values of 2001)?

The simvastin I assume is for the hyperlipedimia?

Hyperlipedimia is also consistent with atherosclerosis.

The BS on the cataracts can be fixed as soon as the VA succumbs medically to your correct date of evidence of diabetes mellitus type II-

confirmed by GTT in Dec 2001.

They might have already realized how incorrect this SOC is-

then again they might know it but hope you dont push the point-

I am so angry to read this SOC because it Happens A LOT more than we know-

If we dont catch what they are trying to pull- they keep OUR money.

When did you formally file this claim?

Diabetes can often be initially diagnosed when a patient comes to an ER with chest pains or even NO chest pains but has had other diabetes symptoms present.

A heart attack can present itself in diabetics due to neuropathy from the diabetes, with NO chest pain at all. This is whathappened to my husband.

He collapsed on the job at VA and they ambulanced him right over to the ER.

He came home hours later in a daze telling me they said he had sinus infection and was to take sudafed 4 times day.

The Med recs revealed he had in fact had a heart attack. It took me quite some time to decifer them.

Instead of any follow care to positively rule in or out heart disease or diabetes as cause of this "silent" heart attack- they did nothing-

In 1992 when he suffered a sudden major CVA-they suspected DMII but that was well hidden in the records-

They instead covedred up his advanced heart disease and gave him minimal meds for the CVA and sent him home.

I know now they SYracuse covered up the obvvious malpractice at the Bath VA hoping he would die and no one would ever find out why.

I proved most of the malpractce for FTCA settlement in 1997. I thought it was over.

In 2002 my daughter in the military had started to think he had been a diabetic because a friend of mine had similira symptoms he had. She begged me to go over the horrible med recs (something I didn want to do)

and re-open the claim because he was incountry Vietnam vet.

Finally in 2003 after doing a lot of research on DMII - I re-opened my DIC claim I was getting 1151 DIC.

I obtained first (this took months) a brief statement from one of his VA doctors at SYracuse-the only one who was on to the possible DMII causing the stroke.He had gone ionto private practice.

I then contacted Dr. BAsh by email with a few references to what evidence I had.

Dr. BAsh called me immediately and was thrilled to learn of the email former VA docs statement.

He said if you have what you emailed me you have-this is a good case.

well enough about that-

VA tried to get 2 Opinions against my claim.I knocked them both down and Dr BAsh also knocked one down.

ALl of you men and women have to realise the VA's MOS is to SAVE money by virtue of these inaccurate and incompetent SOCs.

SOCs that do not address the actual evidence properly.

If you don't fight these SOCs with logic and your evidence line by line- you are enabling the Veterans Administration to keep the compensation YOU deserve.

Here is a claim with the VA going against their own doctor! Because he was right!

Edited November 22, 2009 by Berta

[johnjjr]

Berta,

Attached is a full copy of the determination of my initial claim. It was filed Nov. 7, 2006 via VETSNET.

The 2 glucose tests mentioned in the previous attach were at VAMC. I have 2 more dated before the first cath to show DMII prior to CAD.

Winchester Med Cntr is the pvt hospital where the first cath was done march 30, '01.

I received no medical treatment for DMII until Oct '05 when I was finally diagnosed as new onset DMII. The simvastatin is for hyperlipedemia. Throughout '01 I exhibited symptoms (documented in VA medical records) consistent with DMII. Some were completely ignored, including symptoms of mild PN.

BTW, the decision was made in St Pete, Fla , not my RO.

[Berta]

I strongly suggest that your rep help you prepare a Section 1151 claim-in addition to fighting the present claim-

in my opinion this is malpractice

They are correct here-

as to the EED BUT they failed to diagnose your diabetes until many years after the medical evidence revealed you had diabetes.SO that is why your EED should be more favorable.This is probably why the heart, eye conditions as well as the other stuff.

You could sue them- However it might be far more beneficial for your rep to give these two reasons for service connection- to stress the direct SC disabilities and then push for the 1151 situation if the direct SC claim does not get their attention - a Section 1151 claim sure will.

And of course an SF 95 would too-

But Make sure you have copies of ALL your VA records before you pursue either 1151 or FTCA.

I proved my husband had DMII which never appeared once as diagnosed or treated in all of his VA med recs.

I proved he became symptomatic as early as 1988 while employed by VA and that it ultimately caused his death in 1994.

The claim was filed in Feb 2003 and awarded in April 2009. My EED is 1994.

They mean the date that DMII went into the AO regs-

They could have (SHOULD HAVE) diagnosed you properly on March 26 2001 with DMII due to AO.You have the glucose readings to support that.

The objective evidence on or before May 8 2001 (DMII reg date) is clearly in your records.

EFFECTIVE DATE: The effective date November 07,2006, is based on the date of receipt of your initial claim. In order to be entitled to any retroactive payment prior to date of receipt of claim, there must be objective evidence of a diagnosis of diabetes mellitus, type II on or before May 08, 200 1

Edited November 22, 2009 by Berta

[Berta]

John's post here has gotten many views-

I certainly believe there are AO vets reading this and might need to check their retro dates.

http://www.nvlsp.org/Information/ArticleLi...etrobenefit.htm

If you click on the Earlier Nehmer effective dates link on the left hand side of the NVLSP page- you will understand the complexity of Nehmer (won as a class action case for Beverly Nehmer -AO widow and all other similiarly situated class action members -we have many here at hadit- every AO vet with AO SC is a Nehmer Class action member and their widows are too.

With the potential of the AO Equity ACt becoming law of the land, with the 3 new presumptives, and with the VA still manipulating Nehmer AO claims-I plan on focusing solely on AO claims after end of this year-

The Nehmer court order and Stipulation (actually there is Nehmer I and Nehmer II) is beyond the realm of almost every NSO and vet rep I have met- and they are therefore unable to determine if your award has the proper EED.

I cant stress this enough-if you were denied in the past for a claim that you re-opened- that involved an AO disability-this goes for widows, widowers of AO vets as well as vets themselves-

You might have been given the wrong EED hoping that you would never find out what Nehmer is all about.

As I said before and it is all in the VBM- NVLSP went into ROs years ago and found MILLIONS of retro money was due to thousands of AO vets and widows who didnt even know it

because the VA had successfully ignored the entire Nehmer Court order when they adjudicated their claims.They still are dping it- they are doing it to me.My complaint on this was hand delivered to Shinseki last week.

MILLIONS

MILLIONS exposed to a weapon of mass destruction (AO) by our own gov and then denied their full and proper amount of comp- DISGRACEFUL!

[johnjjr]

Had my C & P exam on Fri 20th. Had appt yesterday so I went to records and got a copy of exam report.

The examiner's dx was almost exactly the same as my pvt neurologist except for one thing. She dx'ed my lower extremities as moderately severe polyneuropathies, but my pvt dr. DX'ed my lower extremities as severe polyneuropathies.

Severe is listed at 60 each limb, moderately severe is listed at 40. that could be the difference between an 80% rating and 100%.

The DRO requested a hearing on the neuropathies. Is there anything I can do to get the C & P rating changed or should I wait til hearing and present?

[Berta]

It sounds like to me-that

the private opinion is supportive of the highest rating-the VA opinion isnt.

Under the rules of Relative Equipoise (Benefit of Doubt)

you should be awarded.Because it sems both opinions are of equal weight.

We need the Peripheral neuropathy experts here to chime in because I wonder what rating you could expect.

I also wonder if this would fall under peripheral arterial disease- as well- but not sure how they rate that.