Ask Your VA Claims Questions | Read Current Posts
Read VA Disability Claims Articles
Search | View All Forums | Donate | Blogs | New Users | Rules
.thumb.png.0b66d11060c658bf7aa45efe4372d3e7.png)
- 0
Announcements
-
Tell a friend
-
Recent Achievements
-
-
Our picks
-
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 rating
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.
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
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.
Picked By
Lemuel, -
-
Question
carlie
I've got another DRO Hearing Wed AM and I am a freaking wreck.
They have these damned issues so discombobulated it's a freaking
mess.
Damn - I'll be reading something and realize it's an SSOC
say from 2008 and it will state something like some material difference
from the SSOC dated 2006.
I start looking thru the evidence and it will say something like,
additional evidence contained in the SOC dated 2005 and evidence submitted
with you NOD on XXX 2004, and all evidence contained in the
Rating Decision dated 2001.
It's a friggin bunch of BS we are put through - right now I am just so
fed up and filled with hate and rage at the freaking bas*@#ds that
don't take any pride in doing adjudication or working in the mail room,
the pre-determination team, or the C&P examiners.
If it weren't for the half azzed work that is done most of the damned
back log would not exist - but hey I guess that's job security.
I just recently had 2 issues SC by BVA - one goes back to 1999.
The VARO figured the effective dates for staged ratings but they
only went by the PFT findings. The decision listed in the evidence 8 different
PFT findings to support their staged ratings - but the bas&$@( that did this
negated to look over or list any of my Echos from 1999 forward, which support
a single 100% rating from 2000 - which would also provide me SMC S from 2000.
OH but hell no - they can't do the Fing job right so now even after all the BS,
I'll have to NOD the damned VARO's poor decision because they did not bother
to adjudicate all of the evidence.
SOB's - I just want to rip the sheet out of something - I am soooooooo glad
I don't drink booze any more or for sure - I would be a bad azz drunk right now.
Carlie passed away in November 2015 she is missed.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Top Posters For This Question
6
5
2
2
Popular Days
May 17
10
May 18
10
Jun 22
3
Top Posters For This Question
carlie 6 posts
retiredat44 5 posts
jbasser 2 posts
Vync 2 posts
Popular Days
May 17 2011
10 posts
May 18 2011
10 posts
Jun 22 2011
3 posts
22 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