Travelboard Judge Decision

[Steppenwolf]

Turned down again. DAV tells me that i have 120 days to ask for reconsideration. i don't see anything in the envelope that says that.

Too many points to rehash but key missing VAMC files are mentioned as found. I have not seen them in 40 years. Who do I ask for copies?

[Steppenwolf]

Berta: "It is miserable to keep re- copying and re-mailng stuff but this is often the only way to insure they get it."

That most of us realize this to be true is in my way of see things: a double edged sword: On one side knowing that if we do not do this redundant, paper producing, paper confusing, time wasting action(s) our odds for a successful case and winning it goes down; so we do it and hopefully it cuts in our favor. On the other-side of the equation knowing this to be true and doing nothing to change it encourages the VA to continue it's dysfunctional behavior with the sword cutting us and our families.

Beware! It did not go un-noticed by the VA: They are well aware of The Goats of Forgiveness reported in the news yesterday. They may try that next. i'm sure they will find one of those special laws applicable to us and only us to support their proposal.

About my appeal: there are three items on appeal. Over the 10 or so years that this case has been open, or is it "reopened" it has morphed. At some point after the TravBrd hearing it became a challenge for service officers and the reps who field the 800number calls. Often they would tell me that there were 6 issues. The best explanation was this if it makes sense: there were three appeals and three remands.

DAV called me on Wed. i spent an hour on the phone attempting to break it all down for the person who returned my call

( someone that i never spoke with before ) He want to know everything. The clock struck 4 and clearly i was being rushed to finish and promised a call back by noon on Thursday. That didn't happen but i spent the morning assembling the critical documents, letter from BVA, RO, Senator, and Travel board judge herself. The more i read the better i understand how confusing everything is. The letter from the judge dated Nov 06 and mentioned in detail in her recent decision letter makes ZERO sense. As I read the Nov letter I remembered exactly what it was in reference to and it had NOTHING to do with her statement in the Mar 2010 letter.

If i could pick one thing about my case over 40plus years that represented a myriad of similar mistakes i might pick this one thing to illustrate the nonsensical way that this system works.

Also: In the letter to the Senator from Varo, Varo claims : "it's complicated and sometimes there isn't an easy answer" However they do tell the Senator that any and all new evidence will generate a SSOC. The evidence that i submitted and got time stamped is not even mentioned in her decision. Not only is the evidence time stamped but i have certified mail to Varo, BVA, and the judge who all received copies of the time stamped evidence along with a statement that the DAV would not submit my evidence and that other Service Organizations refused to take my case while I was in the midst of an appeal. No exceptions!

" Unwritten Rule " as the American Legion SO told me before hanging up because " I don't have the time "

i'd be willing to pay someone, especially if i knew that they were good if not the best at what they do, to review my service records. Of course they would have to know what issues are undeniable and what % each can be awarded. Recently i was told that prostatitis is never more than zero%. Maybe i should just give up on prostatitis.

"Shouldn't the new evidence generate an SSOC?"

AT the VARO level-yes- but are you on a remand from the BVA?

I would make sure -if I were you-to put this evidence before the BVA as a Motion for Reconsideration if you still have time-as well as send it to the VARO.

"And lastly i was asked if my whole service record was ever examined for the issues most likely to be undeniable. The answer is no. Who would/could do such a thing? Does it make sense to find someone to do that?"

Yes it makes complete sense.Find the disabilities that are current but with the most likely possibility of inservice nexus.

A good vet rep or NSO would do that- but most of us here have to do that ourselves.

If you have new evidence it cannot be redundant to what they have already.

If this is preponderant evidence and could turn the tide I would send it anywhere I could-within the time limits. I am surprised that no one gave you a RO Fax number but they move their faxes around so sometimes that isn't a good idea either but the DAV could have faxed it to them.I dont get their attitude here at all.

[Pete53]

I am an optimist most of the time and I think that if a Veteran does not give up and has a claim eventually they will win. I also believe that the VA makes it hard to win claims to protect the treasury and wrongfully so. Our government should keep its promises and help Veterans win the awards that they earned.

[Berta]

"Recently i was told that prostatitis is never more than zero%." I think that is true.

As a symptom, it could lead to other conditions however.

Can you tell us what current documented disabilites you have- that you are seeking SC for?

And were you able to provide the VA what they requested in the VCAA letter they sent when you filed these claims?

Remands- is there anything in the remand that BVA asked VA to do-but is something you could do instead?

Such as if any private records were not obtained by the RO yet?

Or did the BVA request another C & P from an expert?

When my remand called for a cardio opinion- I ordered a cardio opinion myself-

Long story-and I didn't need it as the BVA awarded the claim anyhow based on the evidence they had (3 IMOs and significant other evidence that the Buffalo RO would not read or consider)and their cardio opinion came from a PA who didnt have a clue.I knocked down his opinion myself and immediately sent that statement to the BVA.I provided full medical rationale as a layperson.

IMOs can be expensive but are often the only way to succeed.

The IMO doctor will go through your SMRs to make a nexus statement and then link it to your current disabling conditions 0if the medical evidence warrants that.

It is hard to know what an IMO will reveal.An IMO could go against the claim if the IMO doc cannot make the service linkage with a full medical rationale.

The criteria for getting IMOs is in the IMO forum.

If you are willing to pay someone to go through your SMRS- why not consider paying an IMO doctor?

[john999]

I only succeeded via IMO's. The VA ignored the fact I was on SSD and only awarded 30%. With good IMO's I got 70% and then IU.

[Steppenwolf]

"Recently i was told that prostatitis is never more than zero%." I think that is true.

What a waste of time it has been if 0% is all that it's worth at best. After 40 years i found the exit exam doctor who is willing to admit that he suggested treating the condition without noting it on the exam. His rational had to do with not being discharged with an active condition.

As a symptom, it could lead to other conditions however.

The condition not only got worse; at one point the VA doctor told me "There is nothing more we can do. You will have this the rest of your life." i was 25 yo at the time.

Can you tell us what current documented disabilites you have- that you are seeking SC for?

1."Prostate disorder" This is what it's called on the first page of the decision. It is documented from June 1970 to present on VA records and i have the doctor who is willing to make a statement that i had it during my exit exam. Later in the decision it is called a variety of different things. DENIED

2. "Low back disorder" This is what it's called on the first page of the decision. Later in the decision it is called " degenerative disc disease and degenerative joint disease of the back " There are four incidents of injury to my back while on active duty. Twice it is called "Low back strain" guessed at by a medic ( no xrays ) and agreed to by the doctor who never saw me. Treated with narcotics, muscle relaxers, rest, and "back brace". Once it is called "back pain" and treated with a change of meds. And once it is called " a dislocated back " There are 40 years of VA and private physician records including hospitalization including several ambulance trips to the hospital. Numerous letters from doctors including a detailed letter from a back specialist who reviewed my records and stated that my current condition seems to have had it's onset while on active duty. The judge didn't like the way he said it. DENIED

3. "Anxiety, mood, and BP disorder" Approved 50% Most service records mention work related problems. All independent letters and reports and VA service records mention Unemployable nature of the condition including a 3 month study at a university which states: "you have not been employed for most of the past 39 years since your discharge from the military" I filed a NOD for 70% based on the unemployable history. I have another IMO stating the same.

And were you able to provide the VA what they requested in the VCAA letter they sent when you filed these claims?

Names, dates, places. They couldn't find anything. But i did.

Remands- is there anything in the remand that BVA asked VA to do-but is something you could do instead?

Such as if any private records were not obtained by the RO yet?

Or did the BVA request another C & P from an expert?

Yes to the C&P and Yes i supplied more evidence until my POA would not submit the rest of the new evidence that i had/have.

When my remand called for a cardio opinion- I ordered a cardio opinion myself-

Long story-and I didn't need it as the BVA awarded the claim anyhow based on the evidence they had (3 IMOs and significant other evidence that the Buffalo RO would not read or consider)and their cardio opinion came from a PA who didnt have a clue.I knocked down his opinion myself and immediately sent that statement to the BVA.I provided full medical rationale as a layperson.

IMOs can be expensive but are often the only way to succeed.

The IMO doctor will go through your SMRs to make a nexus statement and then link it to your current disabling conditions 0if the medical evidence warrants that.

It is hard to know what an IMO will reveal.An IMO could go against the claim if the IMO doc cannot make the service linkage with a full medical rationale.

The criteria for getting IMOs is in the IMO forum.

If you are willing to pay someone to go through your SMRS- why not consider paying an IMO doctor?

i have all 3 conditions covered for an IME/IMO and yes they are expensive. Why pay a urologist for an opinion if it will at best equate to a zero? The back doc is a former Marine MD and has been willing to take my case but the disagreement with my POA resulted in the RO sending the case back to BVA. Then i got more bad advice waiving the right of the RO to consider the evidence and the judge minimized my evidence.

Edited April 17, 2010 by Steppenwolf

[Berta]

The CAVC does not accept new evidence-I assume this is why the claim was remanded for the VA to consider it.

"The judge didn't like the way he said it."

Yes the statement was too ambiguous. We have a specific IMO format here under the IMO topic.

I developed it myself by using the IMOs I had from a doctor who used to work for VA so he knew exactly what wording to use.

"seemed to" is not a medical opinion with any rationale that conforms to VA lingo that they can comprehend.It gives them too much leeway to deny.

If the doc had said "I have reviewed the veteran's SMRs and it is as likely as not his present back problems arise from his documented back injuries in his SMRs.The veteran has had chronic problems with his back since leaving service and "..... here he could expand on his medical rationale.

"Anxiety, mood, and BP disorder" Approved 50% Most service records mention work related problems. All independent letters and reports and VA service records mention Unemployable nature of the condition including a 3 month study at a university which states: "you have not been employed for most of the past 39 years since your discharge from the military" I filed a NOD for 70% based on the unemployable history. I have another IMO stating the same."

Have you formally filed for TDIU?

"Yes to the C&P and Yes i supplied more evidence until my POA would not submit the rest of the new evidence that i had/have."

If you are on remand this has opened the door for more evidence.

If they didnt list anything as Evidence in the decision, it means they ignored it and you can submit it again unless it is redundant.