ptsd Post-Hoc And Cue I Think

[mos1833]

in my claim for my back injury, i have tried for years to get the va to assist me in gathering my records.this makes me so mad i cant stand it,below is what i think is a cue because the board ( as stated here is board trying to argue against the courts remand) post-hoc ? they keep asking for the wrong records , i told them i never applied ptsd,and i dont need any verified stressors,i just need the to get the morning reports and lite duty records , any way does this part look right or is it just me ??

REMAND

In part, the Joint Motion stated that because the Veteran had

stated that following two inservice back injuries he had been

placed on light duty for the remainder of his career during

service, the Veteran's service personnel records should have

been obtained prior to the Board's having adjudicated the

claim on the merits.

In this regard, the Board notes that following a March 2006

request, the National Personnel Record Center (NPRC) stated

that it had conducted an extensive and thorough search for

its records and was unable to locate the records requested

(i.e., the Veteran's service personnel records in conjunction

with a claim for service connection for PTSD). On the basis

of the request presented, the NPRC concluded that the records

either do not exist, the NPRC did not have them, or that

further efforts to locate them at the NPRC would be futile.

Nevertheless, the Joint Motion, which has been approved by

the Court, instructs the Board to remand the case for the

purpose of obtaining the Veteran's service personnel records.

[Berta]

“Dr. Roy at the VA Medical Center, Northport told him that Agent Orange caused his liver condition .”

Did you contact Dr. Roy for a medical rationale for his statement?

What a doctor 'says' means nothing to the VA.

If you have a soft tissue sarcoma of your liver it could possibly be associated to AO exposure.

What is the actual diagnosis of the liver condition?

Your Docket number is in all of these claims at the BVA.

http://www.va.gov/vetapp11/Files3/1128380.txt

http://www.va.gov/vetapp08/Files5/0836784.txt

http://www.va.gov/vetapp10/Files1/1009831.txt

http://www.va.gov/vetapp09/Files3/0920630.txt

http://www.va.gov/vetapp02/files04/0215176.txt

http://www.va.gov/vetapp02/files02/0206846.txt

http://www.va.gov/vetapp97/files4/9732280.txt

It looks to me that this is the most recent BVA decision:

http://www.va.gov/vetapp11/Files3/1128380.txt

Two remands had already taken place.The back claim was again denied with appellate rights.

Are all of the above cases regarding you?

[Berta]

In my November 20-10 response to you this was quoted from the BVA remand:

"the Board notes that following a March 2006

request, the National Personnel Record Center (NPRC) stated

that it had conducted an extensive and thorough search for

its records and was unable to locate the records requested

(i.e., the Veteran's service personnel records in conjunction

with a claim for service connection for PTSD)"

Have you tried any other way to prove your nexus for your stressor?

As the BVA stated they could use either the new PTSD criteria or the older one in your case, whichever one was more favorable to your claim.

However they still seem to need proof of the stressor.

Was the buddy statement for the PTSD claim? If not have you attempted to get a Buddy statement for the stressor?

What VA needs in a PTSD buddy statement is here at hadit and searchable.

Basically the buddy had to serve same time and place and their unit should usually be same as yours and/or their MOS put them at the time and place of the alleged stressor and they need to give a full detailed eye witness account that includes you at the scene of the stressor and then,in my opinion, they should have their signature notarized and also give VA all contact info-as VA calls or writes to buddys from time to time to verify their statements.

Often 2 buddy statements are better then one.This way one buddy can corroborate another buddy statement.

If a buddy gets PTSD SC for the very same stressor, the buddy should tell the VA that too.

If VA denies a claim and rejects a buddy statement,and the vet does not appeal- then years after the fact a vet could attempt to re-open with a corroborating buddy statement that could be considered as new and material evidence.

[mos1833]

hi again

nsa-saigon-et, thanks for your reply-but thats not my claim.

berta thanks to you too.

the point i am trying to make is [ this is not a ptsd claim ] and i dont need to prove a stressor, why woluld i need them , ptsd is an old claim they screwed-up so bad that i just droped it. i need my morning reports,to show i was on lite duty,just before i was discharged. the joint remand orders didnt mention them getting any records to prove a stressor,but still they just made a copy and paste effort.

berta in your 23rd nov-2010 reply post in this thread,you said [ the bva's wording was curious ]why cant they get any thing right ?

i think its clear that i dont need proof of a stressor

REMAND

In part, the Joint Motion stated that because the Veteran had

stated that following two inservice back injuries he had been

placed on light duty for the remainder of his career during

service, the Veteran's service personnel records should have

been obtained prior to the Board's having adjudicated the

claim on the merits.

In this regard, the Board notes that following a March 2006

request, the National Personnel Record Center (NPRC) stated

that it had conducted an extensive and thorough search for

its records and was unable to locate the records requested

(i.e., the Veteran's service personnel records in conjunction

with a claim for service connection for PTSD). On the basis

of the request presented, the NPRC concluded that the records

either do not exist, the NPRC did not have them, or that

further efforts to locate them at the NPRC would be futile.

[Berta]

"i think its clear that i don't need proof of a stressor"

Right since you dropped that claim and it is over.

There were many BVA decisions with your docket and I don't have time to read them all.

In one or two of them the BVA mentioned a post service back injury.

Post service injuries can completely negate anything in an SMR-particularly for back claims.

"The records indicated that the Veteran injured his back twice while working for the Fencing Company, with the first injury on January 6, 1979, with a diagnosis of acute traumatic lumbosacral strain with secondary misalignment of cervical and dorsal vertebrae, and the second injury on July 22, 1979, with a diagnosis of acute vertebrogenic radiculitis of L5, which were the first mentions in any record, VA, military, or private, of any injury to the bones (vertebrae) of the lower back. As result, it was less likely than not that the current low back disability was related to the soft tissue injuries (strain and spasm) incurred while in military service and most likely related to the injuries to the lumbar vertebrae incurred while working at the Fencing Co. in 1979. The examiner stated that there was no evidence in literature that linked soft tissue injuries to the development of arthritis."

And an examiner added this:

“and that it would have been difficult to work for a fencing company if he had had significant low back pain, and that his current low back difficulty was not the result of inservice injuries.”

http://www.va.gov/vetapp11/Files3/1128380.txt

[mos1833]

berta,

thanks ,in the remand it clearly states to make a new request for my personnel records,they didnt.

in 1979 the diagnosis was-acute traumatice lumbosacral strain, ever thing else was secondary.

in the next opinion the examiners rational for his opinion was [ it would have been difficult to work as a fencer if i had been in significant low back pain ]how does he know how much pain i can take and still do my job ? he never tested my pain threshold,and yes i did suffer for years while working.

oh; crap iam starting to rant. thank folks

[mos1833]

i told the va that they are requesting the wrong information,the court has told them two times in remand orders

to ask for the correct records, and now they do this,

is this just lack of communication, or a deliberate delay.ive already got on the docket at the court again,my lawer says he thinks we can get another remand.

below is what they did== it just aint right

In conjunction with the March 2010 remand, NPRC, in April 2010, again forwarded the results of the April 2006 prior search conducted which indicated that NPRC had conducted an extensive and thorough search of the records among their holdings. It noted that it was unable to locate the records identified in the request (personnel file). NPRC concluded that the records either did not exist or the records were not located at NPRC.