Jump to content

Ask Your VA Claims Questions | Read Current Posts 
Read VA Disability Claims Articles
Search | View All Forums | Donate | Blogs | New Users | Rules 

  • tbirds-va-claims-struggle (1).png

  • 01-2024-stay-online-donate-banner.png

     

Question For "interested"

Rate this topic


Recommended Posts

  • HadIt.com Elder

You have mail.

A Veteran is a person who served this country. Treat them with respect.

A Disabled Veteran is a person who served this country and bears the scars of that service regardless of when or where they served.

Treat them with the upmost respect. I do. Rejection is not a sign of failure. Failure is not an option, Medical opinions and evidence wins claims. Trust in others is a virtue but you take the T out of Trust and you are left with Rust so be wise about who you are dealing with.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Replies 36
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

  • HadIt.com Elder

Thanks, Berta! No, I haven't been able to talk to anyone. I've emailed them a few times and never received a response, either. I'm going to try to meet w/my Service center Mgr and get it resolved, before writing the Secretary and asking for assistance. Perhaps, as you suggest, I'll write the NVLSP first. Meantime it's on active appeal. As always, thanks, again!

pr

Philip- I got burned out about this issue months ago here BUT only because there has been NO definitive answer to your question from the VA or from anyone else-

even the VBM does not clarify this issue.

I don't think any vet has ever pushed this issue far enough as Bradley V Peake involved an entirely different aspect of SMC.

I think maybe only a BVA denial appealed to the CAVC would resolve this issue.

"I'm prepared to go all the way to the court." GREAT!!!!!!I would do that too if I were you.

Have you called or written to Bart Stickman or Ron Abrams about this?

I suggest writing to them because in 1995 (my relationship with NVLSP started in 1991 but they never have represented me)

I had a long discussion with one of their top guns as to an FTCA question on what they had written in the VBM.

He said I was wrong in my interpretation of something there. We had a long discussion because the FTCA info in the VBM is limited and they always suggest getting an FTCA attorney for help with torts.

I didnt know if I clearly asked the question by phone ----and might have left out something that would have changed his opinion.

I think now -had I written him a letter instead , his answer would have been different.

My interpretation was right- based on my refund offset letter last year (which was quite a battle to get)

But I do believe he was stuck on a specific reg ,correctly interpreting it and I was stuck on how to overcome that reg.

So I feel I should had written to him instead to explain it all.

Then again NVLSP doesnt get involved with specific claims- they are interested in any legal aspects however that could impact other claimants as in your case.

No one ever raised the legal issue I had raised with them in that phone call.And the issue would involve a very limited portion of FTCA claimants.

And had never been tested before as far as I know.

I am checking the 2011 edition in a minute of the VBM to see if they have ever clarified their point in the FTCA section.

If not I will send them a letter.

I think this is a proper discussion here at hadit.

I hoped someone out there in hyperspace would have posted that they succeeded on SMC S due to multiple additional SCs like yours that put them to the S criteria but no one did.Yet.

And we have not had a CAVC case yet to decide this issue so you might be the first CAVC case and you could potentially win and ,if the decision is precedental -

you would alter the lives of MANY veterans.

Edited by Philip Rogers
Link to comment
Share on other sites

As for your ineffectual attempt at baiting, that concept had crossed my mind but I as a charitable person ignored it - that word was brought up by another. Again, if I were not so charitable, I prolly should feel offended by such a weak attempt.

My "opinion" has little to do with anything. What do the books say? One does not have to agree with what is in the books, but one must follow the books. However, if you work hard enough - rather than complaining as another astute poster noted, you just might get things changed. Would I like whatever change comes about? Mebbe, mebbe not - but I go along with it.

While he/she didn'tclarify that aspect of the question asked, "I feel" he/she sortadanced around the CRT portion, with regard to the VA's handling of the"s" award. You feel? You feel? What is unclear in your mind about:

Posted 20September 2011 - 01:25 PM

(snip)

Once the single 100% (or 100% equivalent) is established, it is disregarded for purposes of future computations. You effectively start over with the remaining disabilities, which are combined per 38 CFR 4.26 (if appropriate) and 38 CFR 4.25.

Interested

causalobserver8@aol.com

Link to comment
Share on other sites

jbasser You have mail

GRADUATE ! Nov 2nd 2007 American Military University !

When thousands of Americans faced annihilation in the 1800s Chief

Osceola's response to his people, the Seminoles, was

simply "They(the US Army)have guns, but so do we."

Sameo to us -They (VA) have 38 CFR ,38 USC, and M21-1- but so do we.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • HadIt.com Elder

Interested - okay, thanks! Sorry you feel I was "baiting." Maybe I'm not understanding what posters mean by baiting. Thank you for your final sentence, as that explains what I needed to know and was asking originally. As for the "I feel" that was just me pointing out it was "my" opinion and nothing else. The answer to my original question was answered in your final sentence. Couldn't you have answered that way in the first place and saved all these other posts, in between. Thank you, again!!

pr

As for your ineffectual attempt at baiting, that concept had crossed my mind but I as a charitable person ignored it - that word was brought up by another. Again, if I were not so charitable, I prolly should feel offended by such a weak attempt.

My "opinion" has little to do with anything. What do the books say? One does not have to agree with what is in the books, but one must follow the books. However, if you work hard enough - rather than complaining as another astute poster noted, you just might get things changed. Would I like whatever change comes about? Mebbe, mebbe not - but I go along with it.

While he/she didn'tclarify that aspect of the question asked, "I feel" he/she sortadanced around the CRT portion, with regard to the VA's handling of the"s" award. You feel? You feel? What is unclear in your mind about:

Posted 20September 2011 - 01:25 PM

(snip)

Once the single 100% (or 100% equivalent) is established, it is disregarded for purposes of future computations. You effectively start over with the remaining disabilities, which are combined per 38 CFR 4.26 (if appropriate) and 38 CFR 4.25.

Edited by Philip Rogers
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • HadIt.com Elder

jbasser You have mail

Berta, do you have my new Email address. I changed earlier in the year.

J

A Veteran is a person who served this country. Treat them with respect.

A Disabled Veteran is a person who served this country and bears the scars of that service regardless of when or where they served.

Treat them with the upmost respect. I do. Rejection is not a sign of failure. Failure is not an option, Medical opinions and evidence wins claims. Trust in others is a virtue but you take the T out of Trust and you are left with Rust so be wise about who you are dealing with.

Link to comment
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


  • Tell a friend

    Love HadIt.com’s VA Disability Community Vets helping Vets since 1997? Tell a friend!
  • Recent Achievements

    • Lebro earned a badge
      First Post
    • stuart55 earned a badge
      Week One Done
    • stuart55 earned a badge
      One Month Later
    • Lebro earned a badge
      Conversation Starter
    • Sparklinger earned a badge
      First Post
  • Our picks

    • Caluza Triangle defines what is necessary for service connection
      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
    • Do the sct codes help or hurt my disability rating 
    • 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.   
    • 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

       
    • 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. 
×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

Guidelines and Terms of Use