Had The C&p It Went Good

[dsgsr]

Hi all, Well I had my C&P yesterday (requesting an increase in Depression) It went good. Very caring thorough Doctor. At the end she told me that I DID fit the 100% category for Depression and she felt it was permanent. I am already 100% P&T for 6 combined ratings, this is where the VSO and I disagree. If my depression is increased to 100% and I have 5-other ratings that add up to approximately 85% (50, 40, 30, 20, 20, 1.3 for bilateral) Wouldn't I qualify for SMC-S ????????

Thanks,

David

[carlie]

I would agree that this would open you up to be

eligible for SMC-S.

[dsgsr]

Thank you carlie, Does anyone know of any rulings that would state this fact, Something I could point to or copy and put in front of the VSO too show case law. I did tell the VSO of Bradley V Peake (I don't think he ever looked it up, he was playing a card game on the puter when I walked in). When I made ref. to that BvP case, his statement was (I don't care what that says, that's not the way they do it here).

Thanks,

David

[Pete53]

Actually there are two ways to get an S Rating. The first getting to 60% after the 100% and 2 B as they call it agoraphobia or house bound. You have to get a dx of agoraphobia for the second to work and of course you have to ask for it.

[carlie]

Does anyone know of any rulings that would state this fact, Something I could point to or copy and put in front of the VSO too show case law.

http://edocket.acces.../38cfr3.350.pdf

§ 3.350 Special monthly compensation ratings.

(i) Total plus 60 percent, or housebound; 38 U.S.C. 1114(s). The special

monthly compensation provided by 38

U.S.C. 1114(s) is payable where the veteran has a single service-connected disability rated as 100 percent and,

(1) Has additional service-connected disability or disabilities independently

ratable at 60 percent, separate and distinct from the 100 percent service-connected disability

and involving different anatomical segments or bodily systems, or

(2) Is permanently housebound by reason of service-connected disability

or disabilities. This requirement is met when the veteran is substantially confined as

a direct result of service-connected disabilities to his or her dwelling and the immediate premises or,

if institutionalized, to the ward or clinical areas, and it is reasonably certain

that the disability or disabilities and resultant confinement will continue

throughout his or her lifetime.

[26 FR 1587, Feb. 24, 1961, as amended at 27

FR 4739, May 18, 1962; 28 FR 1587, Feb. 20,

1963; 28 FR 5671, June 11, 1963; 40 FR 54245,

Nov. 21, 1975; 45 FR 25392, Apr. 15, 1980; 46 FR

47541, Sept. 29, 1981; 48 FR 41161, Sept. 14,

1983; 49 FR 47003, Nov. 30, 1984; 54 FR 34981,

Aug. 23, 1989; 60 FR 12886, Mar. 9, 1995; 67 FR

6873, Feb. 14, 2002; 68 FR 55467, Sept. 26, 2003;

74 FR 11483, Mar. 18, 2009]

[Chuck75]

If the VSO doesn't care what the law is, there is a problem. I'd also have to agree that the RO's may not read far enough to get to (2), and seem to forget the last word "or" in (1).

The M-21, now that I think about it, may also skip or alter the plain language meaning of (2). (I honestly don't remember, and haven't read the current version.)

Thank you carlie, Does anyone know of any rulings that would state this fact, Something I could point to or copy and put in front of the VSO too show case law. I did tell the VSO of Bradley V Peake (I don't think he ever looked it up, he was playing a card game on the puter when I walked in). When I made ref. to that BvP case, his statement was (I don't care what that says, that's not the way they do it here).

Thanks,

David

Edited April 20, 2011 by Chuck75

[dsgsr]

Thank you for the replies, And Thank you Carlie, Your GREAT:)

Thanks,

David