Jump to content

Ask Your VA Claims Questions | Read Current Posts 
Read VA Disability Claims Articles
Search | View All Forums | Donate | Blogs | New Users | Rules 

Top 10 VA Disability Claims Articles

  • tbirds-va-claims-struggle (1).png

  • 01-2024-stay-online-donate-banner.png

     

  • 0

Smc "s"

Rate this question

john999

Asked by john999,

 Share

Question

  • HadIt.com Elder
john999 Grand Master

john999

Posted
  • HadIt.com Elder
Posted

I have an indication that the VA is processing my request for a SMC "S" claim due to TDIU plus 60%. It is happening fast one way or the other. They owe me two years of retro on this since I should have been awarded "S" in 2008. You know it buggs me because if I did not hear it here I would never have known, and the VA would never have granted it. If you don't claim it you never get it. The VA is obviously never going to look back at all the IU plus 60% awards and do anything unless the vet claims it. I bet there are plenty of vets with 100% schedular and 60% who don't have "S".

Link to comment
Share on other sites
  • Answers 29
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters For This Question

Popular Days

Top Posters For This Question

Popular Days

29 answers to this question

Recommended Posts

  • HadIt.com Elder
jbasser Grand Master

jbasser

Posted
  • HadIt.com Elder
Posted

I agree Teac. I just want them do do their jobs according to the M21. If not, get someone who can.

J

A Veteran is a person who served this country. Treat them with respect.

A Disabled Veteran is a person who served this country and bears the scars of that service regardless of when or where they served.

Treat them with the upmost respect. I do. Rejection is not a sign of failure. Failure is not an option, Medical opinions and evidence wins claims. Trust in others is a virtue but you take the T out of Trust and you are left with Rust so be wise about who you are dealing with.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
  • HadIt.com Elder
john999 Grand Master

john999

Posted
  • Author
  • HadIt.com Elder
Posted

I think Bradley v Peake opens up an issue that needs to be revisited via the court of vet appeal regarding the "S" SMC. Is it for a certain category of totally disabled vets or just certain totally disabled vets. I believe the decision opened it up and now there will be a push to include every vet who is total plus 60% to go for it. So the only way for a veteran who does not fit the tight guideline of Bradley to get "S" is to file a claim and follow it all the way. If the court can disagree on a policy the VA has followed for years (100% for one disability plus 60%) then they can consider 100% for more than one disability plus 60% for "S". I have a horse in the race since I am IU/70% plus 60%. I think that is a good decision, but I can't see why someone with 100% for more than one disability(plus 60%) should be excluded from consideration for "S". It is a technical issue, but is not logical. We need to follow the law to get benefits but we need to try and expand it just as TDIU/plus 60% was expanded. Vets with 100% for more than one issue can be more disabled than a vet with one 100% disability. If a vet is 100% they are considered totally disabled. Total disability is the question. Am I wrong about that?

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Teac Mentor

Teac

Posted
Posted (edited)

I think Bradley v Peake opens up an issue that needs to be revisited via the court of vet appeal regarding the "S" SMC. Is it for a certain category of totally disabled vets or just certain totally disabled vets. I believe the decision opened it up and now there will be a push to include every vet who is total plus 60% to go for it. So the only way for a veteran who does not fit the tight guideline of Bradley to get "S" is to file a claim and follow it all the way. If the court can disagree on a policy the VA has followed for years (100% for one disability plus 60%) then they can consider 100% for more than one disability plus 60% for "S". I have a horse in the race since I am IU/70% plus 60%. I think that is a good decision, but I can't see why someone with 100% for more than one disability(plus 60%) should be excluded from consideration for "S". It is a technical issue, but is not logical. We need to follow the law to get benefits but we need to try and expand it just as TDIU/plus 60% was expanded. Vets with 100% for more than one issue can be more disabled than a vet with one 100% disability. If a vet is 100% they are considered totally disabled. Total disability is the question. Am I wrong about that?

Total disability is the requirement ...but only total disability based on one medical issue not multiple issues. so that is one disability rated at least 60% with an award of TDIU, plus and additional 60% rating or

One disability rated 100% plus and additional 60% rating

The reason behind the SMC was that those with a singe rating at 100% plue 60% are considered more disabled than those with multiple issues rated 100%. It is logical to have a cut off threshold.

The issue of TDIU plus 60 was always the law, so nothing changed , except now the courts are enforcing the law that the va skirted for so many years...

Edited by Teac
Link to comment
Share on other sites
  • HadIt.com Elder
john999 Grand Master

john999

Posted
  • Author
  • HadIt.com Elder
Posted

Teac

You know vets who are awarded 100% schedular are supposed to be considered for "S". If this is so why would not TDIU vets with one disability of 60% not be considered for "S"? We have a bunch of techical language, but what is the intent? I don't think anyone can prove a vet with 100% for multiple disabilites is any less disabled than a 100% for single issue. I just think vets should push for more. If they are not pushing for more the VA will subtract over time. I am not trying to start a spitball fight just to encourage vets to keep pushing.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Teac Mentor

Teac

Posted
Posted

Teac

You know vets who are awarded 100% schedular are supposed to be considered for "S". If this is so why would not TDIU vets with one disability of 60% not be considered for "S"? We have a bunch of techical language, but what is the intent? I don't think anyone can prove a vet with 100% for multiple disabilites is any less disabled than a 100% for single issue. I just think vets should push for more. If they are not pushing for more the VA will subtract over time. I am not trying to start a spitball fight just to encourage vets to keep pushing.

John,

I agree vets should push for what they are entitled too... no arguement there. And sometimes when vets push even though it looks like they can't win they do win! So I'm not saying veterans shouldn't push issues, I'm just saying this battle was already fought and veterans won this one....

To your arguement...

It stands to reason a single 100% rating is more disabling than any combined 100% rating. People with 100% ratings have serious life threating diseases, or injury. The very reason SMC are awarded is because it is recognized that some disabilities are more disabiling than others. SMC's are awarded to help offset the cost of care takers to seriously disabled veterans. Those rated combined 100% ratings, are not seriously disabled in the true sense. I submit a veteran could have multiple 10% ratings and be combined at 100%, even combined the veterans life would not be seriously impacted if all he had were 10% ratings. ( I am rated 100% for my lungs, I have 8 additional ratings that combine to 90%, and together do not impact my life as much as the one disability rated 100%)

Some could argue, as the va did, that those with 60% ratings and TDIU are not as seriously disable compared to those with a single 100% rating. In fact by the very nature of the rating schedule, this is a good arguement. Those with TDIU already receive special consideration over and above those without TDIU, so why put them at a higher advantage and award them SMC's. Consider this, two veterans with the same exact injuries or disease one is rated TDIU the other is not. How is it one can work and the other cannot? Is the system fair, the veteran without TDIu would say no that he deserves TDIU because he has the same injuries, even though he can work, Were does congress draw the lines?

The bottom line is simply that some veterans are considered to be more disabled than others, and because of this are awarded SMC's to help offset the cost of care.

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
 Share
Go to question listing


  • Tell a friend

    Love HadIt.com’s VA Disability Community Vets helping Vets since 1997? Tell a friend!

  • Recent Achievements

    • First Post
      Lebro
      Lebro earned a badge
      First Post
    • Week One Done
      stuart55
      stuart55 earned a badge
      Week One Done
    • One Month Later
      stuart55
      stuart55 earned a badge
      One Month Later
    • Conversation Starter
      Lebro
      Lebro earned a badge
      Conversation Starter
    • First Post
      Sparklinger
      Sparklinger earned a badge
      First Post

  • Our picks

    • Caluza Triangle defines what is necessary for service connection

      Caluza Triangle defines what is necessary for service connection

      Tbird posted a record in VA Claims and Benefits Information,

      Caluza Triangle – Caluza vs Brown defined what is necessary for service connection. See COVA– CALUZA V. BROWN–TOTAL RECALL

      This has to be MEDICALLY Documented in your records:

      Current Diagnosis.   (No diagnosis, no Service Connection.)

      In-Service Event or Aggravation.
      Nexus (link- cause and effect- connection) or Doctor’s Statement close to: “The Veteran’s (current diagnosis) is at least as likely due to x Event in military service”
      • 0 replies
      Tbird

      Picked By

      Tbird,

    • Post in ICD Codes and SCT CODES?WHAT THEY MEAN?

      Timothy cawthorn posted an answer to a question,

      Do the sct codes help or hurt my disability rating 
      yellowrose

      Picked By

      yellowrose,

    • Post in Chevron Deference overruled by Supreme Court

      broncovet posted a post in a topic,

      VA has gotten away with (mis) interpreting their  ambigious, , vague regulations, then enforcing them willy nilly never in Veterans favor.  

      They justify all this to congress by calling themselves a "pro claimant Veteran friendly organization" who grants the benefit of the doubt to Veterans.  

      This is not true, 

      Proof:  

          About 80-90 percent of Veterans are initially denied by VA, pushing us into a massive backlog of appeals, or worse, sending impoverished Veterans "to the homeless streets" because  when they cant work, they can not keep their home.  I was one of those Veterans who they denied for a bogus reason:  "Its been too long since military service".  This is bogus because its not one of the criteria for service connection, but simply made up by VA.  And, I was a homeless Vet, albeit a short time,  mostly due to the kindness of strangers and friends. 

          Hadit would not be necessary if, indeed, VA gave Veterans the benefit of the doubt, and processed our claims efficiently and paid us promptly.  The VA is broken. 

          A huge percentage (nearly 100 percent) of Veterans who do get 100 percent, do so only after lengthy appeals.  I have answered questions for thousands of Veterans, and can only name ONE person who got their benefits correct on the first Regional Office decision.  All of the rest of us pretty much had lengthy frustrating appeals, mostly having to appeal multiple multiple times like I did. 

          I wish I know how VA gets away with lying to congress about how "VA is a claimant friendly system, where the Veteran is given the benefit of the doubt".   Then how come so many Veterans are homeless, and how come 22 Veterans take their life each day?  Va likes to blame the Veterans, not their system.   
      Lemuel

      Picked By

      Lemuel,

    • Post in Re-embursement for non VA Medical care.

      broncovet posted an answer to a question,

      Welcome to hadit!  

          There are certain rules about community care reimbursement, and I have no idea if you met them or not.  Try reading this:

      https://www.va.gov/resources/getting-emergency-care-at-non-va-facilities/

         However, (and I have no idea of knowing whether or not you would likely succeed) Im unsure of why you seem to be so adamant against getting an increase in disability compensation.  

         When I buy stuff, say at Kroger, or pay bills, I have never had anyone say, "Wait!  Is this money from disability compensation, or did you earn it working at a regular job?"  Not once.  Thus, if you did get an increase, likely you would have no trouble paying this with the increase compensation.  

          However, there are many false rumors out there that suggest if you apply for an increase, the VA will reduce your benefits instead.  

      That rumor is false but I do hear people tell Veterans that a lot.  There are strict rules VA has to reduce you and, NOT ONE of those rules have anything to do with applying for an increase.  

      Yes, the VA can reduce your benefits, but generally only when your condition has "actually improved" under ordinary conditions of life.  

          Unless you contacted the VA within 72 hours of your medical treatment, you may not be eligible for reimbursement, or at least that is how I read the link, I posted above. Here are SOME of the rules the VA must comply with in order to reduce your compensation benefits:

      https://www.law.cornell.edu/cfr/text/38/3.344

       
      Lemuel

      Picked By

      Lemuel,

    • Post in What is the DIC timeline?

      broncovet posted an answer to a question,

      Good question.   

          Maybe I can clear it up.  

          The spouse is eligible for DIC if you die of a SC condition OR any condition if you are P and T for 10 years or more.  (my paraphrase).  

      More here:

      Source:

      https://www.va.gov/disability/dependency-indemnity-compensation/

      NOTE:   TO PROVE CAUSE OF DEATH WILL LIKELY REQUIRE AN AUTOPSY.  This means if you die of a SC condtion, your spouse would need to do an autopsy to prove cause of death to be from a SC condtiond.    If you were P and T for 10 full years, then the cause of death may not matter so much. 
      Lemuel

      Picked By

      Lemuel,
    View All
×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

Guidelines and Terms of Use

  I accept