Jump to content
VA Disability Community via Hadit.com

 Click To Ask Your VA Claims Question 

 Click To Read Current Posts  

  Read Disability Claims Articles 
View All Forums | Chats and Other Events | Donate | Blogs | New Users |  Search  | Rules 

  • homepage-banner-2024-2.png

  • donate-be-a-hero.png

  • 0

Nehmer ?

Rate this question


rotorhead

Question

Having filed for Heart Disease in 2005 and denied in 2006, would a new claim for IHD might be argued under the Nehmen ruling?

Merry Blated Christmas to all veterans and their families. God Bless and keep safe our Troops who are deployed .

God Bless America

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Answers 3
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters For This Question

Popular Days

Top Posters For This Question

3 answers to this question

Recommended Posts

With a past denial and now a soon to be presumptive and with (I assume)provcen Exposure to AO your EED should be the date you filed the original claim.

This is Nehmer in action.

I am posting the NVLSP statement and recommendations in a new post here.

NVLSP (who won the Nehmer case) already -as you can see in their statement -anticipates a way that VA might try to wiggle out of past denied claims that will become presumptive-

In other cases that NVLSP is well aware of, the VA will attempt (as they have done in the past)- to fail to consider any past denials for the same disability such as IHD.

My concern is that the IHD regs will somehow attempt to selectively limit some IHD claims.

There is also potential that a claim was filed for -say atherosclerotic heart disease and the VA will fail wo realise this is surely IHD in different medical terms.

The regs have not been posted yet at the Federal Register site.

The Hairy Cell B and PArkinsons regs will be pretty cut and dried but the IHD will cost the VA MILLIONs so I assume they will word the regulation in such a way that it could limit certain valid claims.

Then again- maybe they wont play around with the definition of IHD-and we as the public will have 2 months to comment on whatever they post as the new reg.

The CLL regulation caused a skirmish between NVLSP and the VA-as the VA didnt want to pay CLL retro under Nehmer-

and there is a special processing devision at VACO that handled the CLL claims (or should have-the ROs didnt send them the claims in each case)

Rick Spaturo of NVLSP (expert in Nehmer) told me a few weeks ago he was surprised that this division is still working on retro claims.

I was advised by this office at VACO to send them a Request for Retro under DMII due to Nehmer.

They not only handled CLL but have handled other Nehmer claims.The VARO ,in spite of my BVA award , never mentioned any cash they owed me-in 2 erroneous award letters I got.And never mentioned my award comes under Nehmer.

I will post the contact info for all that as soon as the regs are posted.

I assume most AO claims under the new presumptives will get the proper EEDs but then again this is whyu NVLSP wants to hear from any vet via email at their site in the link in next topic - who could be affected by all this.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Thanks for the information Berta. I will relay this to my service officer, who by the way has never mentioned Nehmer.I am really trying to build up my confidence in him, but it seems like the lacks a will to really help.

Thankfully I have found this web site to help keep me from making the same mistakes as I have in the past.

Again, thanks to all.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

Guidelines and Terms of Use