Ask Your VA Claims Questions | Read Current Posts
Read VA Disability Claims Articles
Search | View All Forums | Donate | Blogs | New Users | Rules
- 0
-
Tell a friend
-
Recent Achievements
-
Our picks
-
VA Disability Claims: 5 Game-Changing Precedential Decisions You Need to Know
Tbird posted a record in VA Claims and Benefits Information,
These decisions have made a big impact on how VA disability claims are handled, giving veterans more chances to get benefits and clearing up important issues.
Service Connection
Frost v. Shulkin (2017)
This case established that for secondary service connection claims, the primary service-connected disability does not need to be service-connected or diagnosed at the time the secondary condition is incurred 1. This allows veterans to potentially receive secondary service connection for conditions that developed before their primary condition was officially service-connected.
Saunders v. Wilkie (2018)
The Federal Circuit ruled that pain alone, without an accompanying diagnosed condition, can constitute a disability for VA compensation purposes if it results in functional impairment 1. This overturned previous precedent that required an underlying pathology for pain to be considered a disability.
Effective Dates
Martinez v. McDonough (2023)
This case dealt with the denial of an earlier effective date for a total disability rating based on individual unemployability (TDIU) 2. It addressed issues around the validity of appeal withdrawals and the consideration of cognitive impairment in such decisions.
Rating Issues
Continue Reading on HadIt.com-
- 0 replies
Picked By
Tbird, -
-
Are all military medical records on file at the VA?
RichardZ posted a topic in How to's on filing a Claim,
I met with a VSO today at my VA Hospital who was very knowledgeable and very helpful. We decided I should submit a few new claims which we did. He told me that he didn't need copies of my military records that showed my sick call notations related to any of the claims. He said that the VA now has entire military medical record on file and would find the record(s) in their own file. It seemed odd to me as my service dates back to 1981 and spans 34 years through my retirement in 2015. It sure seemed to make more sense for me to give him copies of my military medical record pages that document the injuries as I'd already had them with me. He didn't want my copies. Anyone have any information on this. Much thanks in advance.-
- 4 replies
Picked By
RichardZ, -
-
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
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 ratingPicked 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.Picked By
Lemuel, -
-
Question
Guest fla_viking
Dear Fellow Veterans & Friends.
This is the rough draft of my appeal I went to the informal appeal format. I have found lawyers are loosing CUE claims because the court picks fights over the lawyers interpitaon and aplicaon of its previous rulings on CUE. So there is no wiggel room for the court to confuse itself on law and its previous rulings. I basicly stuck to the format of what the law is in my case, statement of facts, and queston the court if that is a CUE under title 38.
UNITED STATES COURT OF VETERANS APPEALS
WILLIAM T. HIGGINS
V.
JAMES NICKILSON
INFORMAL APPEAL
nOW comes William T. Higgins petitioner appealing from the BVA May 17 2006 denial of CUE.
38 CFR 20.1403 the correct facts as they were known were not before the board, or the statutory and regulatory provisions extant at the tiee were incorrectly applied
ISSUES FOR THE COURT TO RESOLVE
1. Post Bell v. Derweinski CUE
2. Is bell v. Derwiniski relevean when the VA obtains records and keeps it secret
3. Do I have a right not to be represeneted by council? Nor have the American Legion submit briefs without my knowledge or being consulted?
It is established by the May 17, 2006 BVA ruling. The 1980 VA MMPI report was not obtained by the board in 1981 and that in 1999 the board found the 1980 MMPI report to be new and material and changed the outcome of the claim
The VA ignored the issue of back pay from Bell in 1992 to 1996 adn the issue weather or not the MMPI report was of record at the time. In 2002 in order to deny back pay. The St. Petersburg RO changed a previous BVA finding and ruled the missing MMPI report ws placed into the file in March of 1987. No one in the VA, myself, or my counsel ws notified of this act. Assuming the missing MMPI repoert was in the C file. When I tried to re oopen m claim from 1992 to 1996. The VA ruled the MMPI report ws not new and material. The VA assumed it ws of the record back in its 1881 decision, when if fact it ws not of record until 1987. This created a situation where the facts as they were known were before the VA but hidden from being reviewed because no one knew it was not of the 1981 record. Then snuck into the file in 1987. By the 1992 thru 1996 denial of my claim. The VA incorrrectly assumed it had been ruled on. Which caused 10 more years of denied benifits.
Although teh RO 2002 findings channge the factual basis of my CUE issue. Its still a CUE to secretly insert a key document without notifying either party of this act. Providing you beliveve the RO findings. Now we have the facts as they are known before the VA, but really is not because no one knows the facts are there. This is a factual difference from the Bell ruling.
I want to caution the court on the trughfulness of the RO findings. the St pete RO found in 2001 I was entitled to 1 year back pay. It took 3 years of appeals to change this finding. I had 22 years on SSDI, 19 years in a VA hospital and vets home for the service connected condition with current medical opinions linking my condition to service. Even so the St Pete RO ruled. "My complaints to my VA Dr's about the RO corruption, now shows the RO that the RO is the cause of my increased schizophrenia. The RO found my complaints statted the prior year. So i get 1 year back pay. The RO also denied other benefits citing from my Dr reports. "He combs his hair and wears a T shirt saying. Stop VA claiims fraud". It woudl take me years on appeals to over come that RO findings
All the benefits I ws being denied by the RO ws based on my complaints to the VA Dr's about the RO. This was an act of retaliaton by the RO.
The VA relied on thise missing documents for decades to deny my claim. BVA made a factual finding it was not in my C file. Now I come to this court with a last minute end run by the RO finding the missing documents was there since 1987. I knot know what to believe. the court will have to pick which story it likes best. None the less. Its still CUE to obtain docuemts and nott notify any one of this
Question: If the court chooses the 1999 BVA finding wherein the missing MMPI report was not of the record from 1981 to 1999. does that constitue a CUE from post Bell 1992 to 1996 as defined by the aboce title 38?
Question: IF the court believes the RO 2002 findings that the missing MMPI report ws placed into the file in 1987. Was it CUE for the VA to obtain the missing report. Tell no one it had it, and then place it into the file? Does this constitue CUE for the years 1987 thru 1999 as defined by the above titel 38?
To allow the VA to set a later effective date due to its failure to obtain records and when it does obtain the records the VA tells no one it has them. This poison fruit alwo the VA to den claims as long as its done incomepetently. As of now VA is accountable to now standards of claims review if it shuffels the deck in violaton of its own record keeping standards.
American Legioin representaton without consultation. Do I have a right not to be represened by council. Self representaion has a proud history ging back to the Bysentine era where for a dollar lawyers sold out there clinents. I had no idea the American Legion took over POA. The Al never contacted me or consulted me regarding teh brief they submetted. Even if the court finds I dont have the right to self representation. Any work done on my case and briefs submitted. I should be consulted with.
The only progress I made was when I went on m own to demand for the first time in 22 years a C&P. Back in the early 1980 VBA said no C&P and not one of the 3 VSO I had every challenge the VA ruling
I believe the AL slipped in a red herring argument regarding Duty to assist upon which the VA ignored the crux of two issues on my case and just followed the Al lead and confuesd itself on the DTA issue
I would request the court to order the VAO not to represent any one without there permission or submit a brief without review from the unsuspecting client.
Respectfully preented:
William T. Higgins
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Top Posters For This Question
2
Popular Days
Jun 13
3
Jun 21
2
Top Posters For This Question
Berta 2 posts
Popular Days
Jun 13 2006
3 posts
Jun 21 2006
2 posts
4 answers to this question
Recommended Posts