tinnitus Increase In Comp Claim

[jet187]

Hi all,

a friend of mine is a Vietnam vet,he was SC 0% non-compensation years ago for hearing & tinnitus.

Hearing is getting bad & hearing aids might be in order soon.

How does he file for increase of comp from 0%?

Does he file another claim form?

Any help is appreciated,

Jetpack

[JustPLS]

The codes are carried on what used to be the blue sheet, usually at the end of the decision. I don't believe they send those out, w/the decision, these days. I'm thinking tinnitus is a neurological disease/injury but I'm not sure, since the noise is in your head, not the ears??? Most tinnitus is caused by acoustic trauma but there are other causes.

A/1/8 was in our brigade. Were you at LZ English, on 6/5/67, when they hit the ammo dump & POL point?? I've never been to fireworks since. That's the night I really thought I was gonna die. Sometimes it seems like yesterday.

pr

Nope. I didn't arrive at English until early November. I heard about it though.

An yes, I think it is considered to be neurological these days. Thanks,

[JustPLS]

JustPls

Just a point of fact. During WWII Janpanese soldiers did eat Americans. They would behead a prisoner and ear his liver. I believe at some point they ate them for food value since on some islands the Japs were starving and would scour the battlefield for dead enemy to eat.

Hi, John,

I'm sorry, but I'm missing your point. Did I miss a post somewhere?

Pat

[JustPLS]

JustPls

Just a point of fact. During WWII Janpanese soldiers did eat Americans. They would behead a prisoner and ear his liver. I believe at some point they ate them for food value since on some islands the Japs were starving and would scour the battlefield for dead enemy to eat.

Ah...I see..."they can kill you but they can't eat you - it against the law". I gotcha' now. Thanks - but wasn't it still against the law?

Pat

[Commander Bob]

JustPLS - could you, or someone, post for me the rating code number(or whatever they're called) for tinnitus, so I can do some quick research? I'm fairly sure you can go back to '74.

BTW, I was an 11B4P, w/HHC, 1st Bde (Abn), 1st Cav, from 7/1/65 - 9/17/67, having arrived in 9/65, w/the original division deployment. I left An Khe on 9/17/67.

pr

Try 38 C.F.R. § 4.27, tinnitus rating code number 6260

Here is some old, but helpful info

http://www.wildfleckenveterans.com/faq-pro...=015&id=435

[Philip Rogers]

Thanks, Commander Bob!! Here's the info from the 6260 code that Commander Bob posted. I guess it is rated under the ear, after all.

6260 Tinnitus, recurrent 10%

Note (1): A separate evaluation for tinnitus may be combined with an evaluation under diagnostic codes 6100, 6200, 6204, or other diagnostic code, except when tinnitus supports an evaluation under one of those diagnostic codes.

Note (2): Assign only a single evaluation for recurrent tinnitus, whether the sound is perceived in one ear, both ears, or in the head.

Note (3): Do not evaluate objective tinnitus (in which the sound is audible to other people and has a definable cause that may or may not be pathologic) under this diagnostic code, but evaluate it as part of any underlying condition causing it.

So, the original award should have been 10%, which should get you 10% retro many yrs. jmo

pr

Nope. I didn't arrive at English until early November. I heard about it though.

An yes, I think it is considered to be neurological these days. Thanks,

[JustPLS]

Thanks, Commander Bob!! Here's the info from the 6260 code that Commander Bob posted. I guess it is rated under the ear, after all.

6260 Tinnitus, recurrent 10%

Note (1): A separate evaluation for tinnitus may be combined with an evaluation under diagnostic codes 6100, 6200, 6204, or other diagnostic code, except when tinnitus supports an evaluation under one of those diagnostic codes.

Note (2): Assign only a single evaluation for recurrent tinnitus, whether the sound is perceived in one ear, both ears, or in the head.

Note (3): Do not evaluate objective tinnitus (in which the sound is audible to other people and has a definable cause that may or may not be pathologic) under this diagnostic code, but evaluate it as part of any underlying condition causing it.

So, the original award should have been 10%, which should get you 10% retro many yrs. jmo

pr

Thanks, PR. I will include that in my appeal.