Rating Reduction

[hp1030]

Hello All:

I need some guidance please.

After I rated above 100% overall SC conditions (90% real rating)(skin 50+severe headaches 30+depresion 30) and requested IU, I was (C&P) reevaluated briefly again for my SC Skin condition rated and stablished for more than ten years at 50% and the condition was reduced to 10%. I am rated at 60 % now. Thus taking away any posibilities of IU been approved. By letter I mentioned to them that this was not a rate increase case like they have treated these one, but a rate reduction case and they had to abide by the written law(Sorakubo V.Principi) but they make no mention to this fact on their decision. They base and sustain this reduction on a supposed improvement.All the leters from my private doctors mention the fact that the contidion has not improved and continues to worsen progresively.This seems to have no weight for them.

I will appeal to the BVA and will request a personal hearing. What would be your advice as of my next steps; strategy??

Thanks in advance.

[Dorothy Kansas]

Have you been rated for 5 or more years at the condition they propose to reduce if not they have to show sustained improvement. The examination has to be as complete as the one when you were granted the rating.

[Berta]

Dorothy is correct and I would fight them toe to toe on this-

"They base and sustain this reduction on a supposed improvement.All the leters from my private doctors mention the fact that the contidion has not improved and continues to worsen progresively.This seems to have no weight for them"

How did they refer to this medical information in the denial?

I assume you sent them a Notice of Disagreement- if I were you I would send another letter and put Evidence and Statement in Support of Claim on it and then refer them to and attach the medical statements you have that show sustained improvement has not occurred.

It would help to add the background of these doctors and why their opinion is valid.

Is that what they questioned? their medical rationale or did they just ignore these opinions?

It seems a vet these days often has to shove their med evidence right in their faces- why feel that the BVA-will do any better on this if the BVA itself does not have the opinions you have and understands their validity?

Just my opinion but I would request A DRO de novo review on this-

and emphatically insist that they consider the opinions you have-

Vets in the last few years have seemed to need ,more and more,- independent medical opinions to suceed in their claims-

but if the VA can ignore them ,they will- and the vet has to take a stand on this and get them to consider them.

[Guest fla_viking]

Dear Veteran

It was good you went to the BVA and not mess around the RO any more. IF they gave no informaton as to why your Dr statements were not valid. The courts have ruled over and over the RO cannot just dismiss Dr statements unless there is fraud or go beyound the standard medical pratice.

Do not ask for a hearing at the BVA. It takes years for that to happen. They do have a traviling board but they are backed up also. IF you have the facts and evidence to support your claim. Just submitt it. Im at the BVA level on CUE myself and I have a 1 year 9 months wait before they even get to my claim to look at it. If you ask for a hearing. 2 years from now they get to your claim and see you want a hearing and then put you at the end of the line for another year or two to see the board.

Terry Higgins

[hp1030]

Hello Again:

First, thank you all for your prompt answers and valid and uncompromised support.

Dorothy, yes I was rated at 50% fot my skin condition for 10(ten) years not 5(five).My last eval was done and reaffirmed on sept.2004. The RO makes no mention of this fact. They insit in treating this as a rate increase case not a rate reduction case. I cited to them directly from VBM 5.9.3. So you are completly correct.

Terry I agree totally with you on Dorothy's appretiation of the facts. To answer your question, they do not refer to the medical info submitted at all. All the say is that i've been treated by them for the skin condition.

The next sentence read like this" The treatment from private physicians does not report.... and the rest is left blank. The also mention a period of one month we my record is alegedlly silent(10/08/04-11/15/04)

On Sept 24 2004 they had detemined that my condition haven't changed and continued rated a t 50% disabling. this was the 3rd or 4th re evaluation of my condition. I guess they just ignored their expert opinions.

Viking, I read you loud and clear, and willco with your .

Thanks in advance;

HP