Jump to content
  • Latest Donations

  • Advertisemnt

  • 14 Questions about VA Disability Compensation Benefits Claims

    questions-001@3x.png

    When a Veteran starts considering whether or not to file a VA Disability Claim, there are a lot of questions that he or she tends to ask. Over the last 10 years, the following are the 14 most common basic questions I am asked about ...
    Continue Reading
     
  • Ads

  • Most Common VA Disabilities Claimed for Compensation:   

    tinnitus-005.pngptsd-005.pnglumbosacral-005.pngscars-005.pnglimitation-flexion-knee-005.pngdiabetes-005.pnglimitation-motion-ankle-005.pngparalysis-005.pngdegenerative-arthitis-spine-005.pngtbi-traumatic-brain-injury-005.png

  • Advertisemnt

  • Advertisemnt

  • Ads

  • Can a 100 percent Disabled Veteran Work and Earn an Income?

    employment 2.jpeg

    You’ve just been rated 100% disabled by the Veterans Affairs. After the excitement of finally having the rating you deserve wears off, you start asking questions. One of the first questions that you might ask is this: It’s a legitimate question – rare is the Veteran that finds themselves sitting on the couch eating bon-bons … Continue reading

Sponsored Ads

  • Searches Community Forums, Blog and more

  • Donation Box

    Please donate to support the community.
    We appreciate all donations!
  • Available Subscriptions

  • 0
Sign in to follow this  
RDT

Cue Agent Orange

Question

If you have an enjection fraction of 48% in the year 2002. Would not your rating be 60%.

The VA rated me 10% retro for 2002 based on a C&P in 2008 that guest MET at 10,C&P in 2009 that quest MET at 11 and last C&P in 2010 that show MET at 5 and injection fraction at 50%

I would think it would be 60% based on the injection fraction in the year 2002, not some C&P in 2008-2009 that I disputed.

Would a rating in 2000 that show 40% and a new award at 60% no bet = 78%

Thanks

RDT

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Recommended Posts

Gee, the silence is deafening ...

First, is this a recent Rating Decision? What was the date on the notification letter? If the Decision is dated within the last year, a Notice of Disagreement (NOD) would likely be better - and perhaps quicker - than filing a Clear and Unmistakable Error (CUE). Unless of course, ya just gots ta' have a CUE to fulfill some inner need.

If everything actually is as you wrote, and all the alleged medical evidence is of record in your claims file, this is how the evaluation for coronary artery disease (I presume) should run:

2002-2008 : 60% because of EF between 30 and 50%.

2008-2009: Reduced to 10% because of METS greater than 7 but not less than 10.

2009: Reduction to 0% because of METS greater than 10.

2010: Increase to 60% because of METS greater than 3 but less than or (or, EF between 30 and 50%)

While I admit your medical findings are all over the chart, you'd need some other evidence to countervail or overcome the C&P examinations from 2008 and 2009 that you dispute. You might need your own Independent Medical Opinion (IMO), based on a review of all your treatment records, that those C&Ps were invalid.

As for Would a rating in 2000 that show 40% and a new award at 60% no bet = 78% , the actual number depends upon whether that 40% is a single 40%: several disabilities that combine to 40%; whether the bilateral factor comes into play, and so forth. However, almost any way you compute it, the number is 75% or greater, which rounds up to 80%.

If you have an enjection fraction of 48% in the year 2002. Would not your rating be 60%.

The VA rated me 10% retro for 2002 based on a C&P in 2008 that guest MET at 10,C&P in 2009 that quest MET at 11 and last C&P in 2010 that show MET at 5 and injection fraction at 50%

I would think it would be 60% based on the injection fraction in the year 2002, not some C&P in 2008-2009 that I disputed.

Would a rating in 2000 that show 40% and a new award at 60% no bet = 78%

Thanks

RDT

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Ad

Than You for the responds.

The 2 C&P were by nnew Nurse and lasted about 20 minutes. That is why I disputed them and when they scheduled the new C&P in Janurary 2011 it shower the correct LVL and METS, which matched in 2000. As you can see in the decision the VA stated the LVL was 48% in 2000.

I will file a NOD. I will keep searching here on the site to see if I can find how they apply medical evidents on a claim that is 11 years old.

Thanks for your advise and any other input would be great.

Ray

Gee, the silence is deafening ...

First, is this a recent Rating Decision? What was the date on the notification letter? If the Decision is dated within the last year, a Notice of Disagreement (NOD) would likely be better - and perhaps quicker - than filing a Clear and Unmistakable Error (CUE). Unless of course, ya just gots ta' have a CUE to fulfill some inner need.

If everything actually is as you wrote, and all the alleged medical evidence is of record in your claims file, this is how the evaluation for coronary artery disease (I presume) should run:

2002-2008 : 60% because of EF between 30 and 50%.

2008-2009: Reduced to 10% because of METS greater than 7 but not less than 10.

2009: Reduction to 0% because of METS greater than 10.

2010: Increase to 60% because of METS greater than 3 but less than or (or, EF between 30 and 50%)

While I admit your medical findings are all over the chart, you'd need some other evidence to countervail or overcome the C&P examinations from 2008 and 2009 that you dispute. You might need your own Independent Medical Opinion (IMO), based on a review of all your treatment records, that those C&Ps were invalid.

As for Would a rating in 2000 that show 40% and a new award at 60% no bet = 78% , the actual number depends upon whether that 40% is a single 40%: several disabilities that combine to 40%; whether the bilateral factor comes into play, and so forth. However, almost any way you compute it, the number is 75% or greater, which rounds up to 80%.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

My 40% in 2000 was for chronic low back syndrome. It was increased to 50% in 2003. Not sure how the bylateral factor work on this.

Thanks

Ray

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Each bit of information makes this clearer ... almost like having full access to your claims file and being able to read it. In any event, based on what you've written, I presume you are a boots-on-the-ground Vietnam vet; you have been diagnosed with CAD/IHD; and, you initially filed a claim for service connection for CAD/IHD in 2002 (or have an implied claim from that date); your claim was resurrected (or transferred for processing under Nehmer); and, you are potentially eligible for retroactive disability compensation under Nehmer from sometime in 2002 .... am I correct, more or less?

Anyway, it is still not clear to me whether you have received a Rating Decision based on the disputed examinations/information from 2008 and 2009. Have you already received that Rating Decision? If so, a NOD is the way to go. If not, you have nothing to disagree with - yet.

However, your situation would not be a Clear and Unmistakable Error (CUE) because a CUE is a mis-application of the laws. From what you wrote, it appears to me that the laws, based on the evidence at hand, were applied properly. So, the NOD is the better way to go.

FYI, a C&PE is in most cases but a snapshot of a veteran's condition at that moment. Again in most cases, unless a Rating Veterans Service Representative (RVSR) has something else that states that those examinations were invalid, the RVSR still has to go with the examinations; otherwise, the RVSR would be supplying his/her own medical diagnosis. So, unless that C&PE from 2011 mentioned that those examinations were invalid, I'm afraid that the examinations likely will stand. With those erratic exams, an RVSR likely would: (a) have to rate the claim with the evidence at hand; or, (b) delay the claim even longer by sending the claims file back to the last examiner to state whether the previous two exams were valid/invalid; or, © do some fancy footwork to state why the disputed exams were invalid; again, this verges on supplying a medical opinion.

FWIW, when a nurse practitioner (CNP) says something that is in the veteran's favor, that CNP is caring, compassionate, and really knowledgeable. If the CNP states something negative, or with which the veteran disagrees, the CNP is superficial and incompetent.

Than You for the responds.

The 2 C&P were by nnew Nurse and lasted about 20 minutes. That is why I disputed them and when they scheduled the new C&P in Janurary 2011 it shower the correct LVL and METS, which matched in 2000. As you can see in the decision the VA stated the LVL was 48% in 2000.

I will file a NOD. I will keep searching here on the site to see if I can find how they apply medical evidents on a claim that is 11 years old.

Thanks for your advise and any other input would be great.

Ray

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Based on what you wrote in this and your earlier messages, and a little knowledge of the Rating Schedule, it's not likely that the bilateral factor has any bearing in this situation. Unless, of course, there's something else ....

My 40% in 2000 was for chronic low back syndrome. It was increased to 50% in 2003. Not sure how the bylateral factor work on this.

Thanks

Ray

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

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 account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
Sign in to follow this  

  • Ads

  • Ad

  • Latest News
  • Our picks

    • SHOW YOUR SUPPORT: Ad Free Subscriptions to the Forum available
      Ad free subscriptions are available for the forum. Subscriptions give you the forums ad free and help support the forum and site. Monthly $5 Annually $50 https://community.hadit.com/subscriptions/

      Every bit helps - Thank you.

       
      • 0 replies
    • Choosing a VA Disability Attorney Means Learning What Questions to Ask
      Choosing a VA Disability Attorney Means Learning What Questions to Ask. Chris Attig - Veterans Law Blog 

      <br style="color:#000000; text-align:start">How to Hire an Attorney For Your VA Claim or Appeal Free Guidebook available on the Veterans Law Blog

      I got an email the other day from a Veteran.  It had 2 or 3 sentences about his claim, and then closed at the end: “Please call me. So-and-so told me you were the best and I want your help.”

      While I appreciate the compliments, I shudder a little at emails like this.  For 2 reasons.

      First, I get a lot of emails like this.  And while I diligently represent my clients – I often tell them we will pursue their claim until we have no more appeals or until we win – I am most assuredly not the best.

      There are a LOT of damn good VA Disability attorneys out there.  (Most, if not all, of the best are members of the National Organization of Veterans Advocates…read about one of them, here)

      Second, I don’t want Veterans to choose their attorney based on who their friend thought was the best.  I want Veterans to choose the VA Disability attorney who is BEST for their case.

      In some situations, that may be the Attig Law Firm.

      But it may also be be Hill and Ponton, or Chisholm-Kilpatrick, or Bergman Moore.  Or any one of the dozens of other attorneys who have made the representation of Veterans their professional life’s work.

      There are hundreds of attorneys that are out there representing Veterans, and I’m here to tell you that who is best for your friend’s case may not be the best for your case.

      How do you Find the Best VA Disability Attorney for your Claim?

      First, you have to answer the question: do you NEED an attorney?

      Some of you don’t...
      • 1 reply
    • VA Emergency Medical Care
      VA Emergency Medical Care
      • 3 replies
    • Veterans Appeals Improvement and Modernization Act
      Veterans Appeals Improvement and Modernization Act
      • 0 replies
    • Thanks Berta for your help. I did receive my 100% today for my IU claim on 6/20/2018. It only took 64 days to complete and it is p&t. Thanks for your words of wisdom. 
×

Important Information

{terms] and Guidelines