We all know the VA LOVES to take a sawzall to our claim, chopping it up into several pieces, often meaning decades of delays, but the question is do they really have a legal basis to do this? While we all know they have done it, it may be time to "call them" on this and appeal it preventing it for the future.
ONE example (there are many):
I applied for: (quoting from my VCAA letter): "Disability compensation benefits for hearing loss".
When it got to the BVA, it was already "cut" to (quoting from BVA decision) "service connection for hearing loss".
Can you see how it was "chopped"? I did not apply for "service connection" to the exclusion of other things..because service connection, at 0%, means NO compensation. The BVA did not take up the whole issue. I was asking for compensation...MONEY...not
free bouncy balls because I am service connected. Further, my claim for benefits established the effective date.
Service connection is only ONE issue...another is disability percentage, and still another is effective date. Now I have to go back to the BVA and have them decide the effective date, which should have already been decided.
If you read Roberson, below, you will note as my pastor might say....the VA is supposed to decide some of our claims....No? What percent of our claims? Oh, ALL of them..and this is what congress mandated. So if they have to decide all of them, does this mean they can chop them up and just decide part?
Roberson Principii states:
Roberson alleges that Norris v. West, 12 Vet. App. 413 (1999), is applicable and holds that the VA’s requirement that TDIU be specifically requested “loses sight of the Congressional mandate that the VA is to ‘fully and sympathetically develop the veteran’s claim to its optimum before decision on its merits.’” Norris, 12 Vet. App. at 420 (citing Hodge v. West, 155 F.3d 1356, 1362-63 (Fed. Cir. 1998)). Although Norris does not bind this court as precedent, it is both on-point and informative.
<br clear="all" style="page-break-before: always; ">The facts of Norris are similar to the present case. Norris was rated 70 percent disabled from a mental disorder. Id. at 415. His rating was increased to 100 percent based on 38 C.F.R. § 4.16 (i.e., the same basis for increasing Roberson’s rating to 100 percent). Id. at 416. Before the Court of Appeals for Veterans Claims, Norris alleged CUE in not giving him an earlier effective date for his 100 percent rating. Id. The government alleged that an informal claim for TDIU was not raised under the specific facts of Norris’s case because entitlement to TDIU requires a showing of at least an informal claim specifically alleging TDIU. Id. The Court of Appeals for Veterans Claims rejected the government’s argument because such a position “loses sight of VA’s congressional mandate that VA is to ‘fully and sympathetically develop the veterans’ claim to its optimum before deciding it on its merits.’” Id. at 420 (citing Hodge v. West, 155 F.3d 1356, 1362-63 (Fed. Cir. 1998)). In addition, the Court of Appeals for Veterans Claims stated that developing a claim “to its optimum” must include determining all potential claims raised by the evidence and applying all relevant law and regulation raised by that evidence regardless of how the claim is identified.Id.
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”
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.
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:
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.
Question
broncovet
We all know the VA LOVES to take a sawzall to our claim, chopping it up into several pieces, often meaning decades of delays, but the question is do they really have a legal basis to do this? While we all know they have done it, it may be time to "call them" on this and appeal it preventing it for the future.
ONE example (there are many):
I applied for: (quoting from my VCAA letter): "Disability compensation benefits for hearing loss".
When it got to the BVA, it was already "cut" to (quoting from BVA decision) "service connection for hearing loss".
Can you see how it was "chopped"? I did not apply for "service connection" to the exclusion of other things..because service connection, at 0%, means NO compensation. The BVA did not take up the whole issue. I was asking for compensation...MONEY...not
free bouncy balls because I am service connected. Further, my claim for benefits established the effective date.
Service connection is only ONE issue...another is disability percentage, and still another is effective date. Now I have to go back to the BVA and have them decide the effective date, which should have already been decided.
If you read Roberson, below, you will note as my pastor might say....the VA is supposed to decide some of our claims....No? What percent of our claims? Oh, ALL of them..and this is what congress mandated. So if they have to decide all of them, does this mean they can chop them up and just decide part?
Roberson Principii states:
Roberson alleges that Norris v. West, 12 Vet. App. 413 (1999), is applicable and holds that the VA’s requirement that TDIU be specifically requested “loses sight of the Congressional mandate that the VA is to ‘fully and sympathetically develop the veteran’s claim to its optimum before decision on its merits.’” Norris, 12 Vet. App. at 420 (citing Hodge v. West, 155 F.3d 1356, 1362-63 (Fed. Cir. 1998)). Although Norris does not bind this court as precedent, it is both on-point and informative.
<br clear="all" style="page-break-before: always; ">The facts of Norris are similar to the present case. Norris was rated 70 percent disabled from a mental disorder. Id. at 415. His rating was increased to 100 percent based on 38 C.F.R. § 4.16 (i.e., the same basis for increasing Roberson’s rating to 100 percent). Id. at 416. Before the Court of Appeals for Veterans Claims, Norris alleged CUE in not giving him an earlier effective date for his 100 percent rating. Id. The government alleged that an informal claim for TDIU was not raised under the specific facts of Norris’s case because entitlement to TDIU requires a showing of at least an informal claim specifically alleging TDIU. Id. The Court of Appeals for Veterans Claims rejected the government’s argument because such a position “loses sight of VA’s congressional mandate that VA is to ‘fully and sympathetically develop the veterans’ claim to its optimum before deciding it on its merits.’” Id. at 420 (citing Hodge v. West, 155 F.3d 1356, 1362-63 (Fed. Cir. 1998)). In addition, the Court of Appeals for Veterans Claims stated that developing a claim “to its optimum” must include determining all potential claims raised by the evidence and applying all relevant law and regulation raised by that evidence regardless of how the claim is identified. Id.
I would like opinions:
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Top Posters For This Question
5
3
1
1
Popular Days
Mar 26
6
Mar 27
3
Mar 28
3
Top Posters For This Question
broncovet 5 posts
Philip Rogers 3 posts
john999 1 post
boomer2 1 post
Popular Days
Mar 26 2011
6 posts
Mar 27 2011
3 posts
Mar 28 2011
3 posts
11 answers to this question
Recommended Posts
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 accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now