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

     

  • 0

Changing Tdiu To 100% Schedular

Rate this question


cooter

Question

What is the common procedure when your rated TDIU and later awarded enough ratings to qualify for 100% schedular and you want to have it changed.

Coot

!!!BROKEN ARROW!!!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Answers 13
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters For This Question

Recommended Posts

  • HadIt.com Elder

The way I got my "S" was I had 80% TDIU when I got an additional 60% for a single issue. I did have to file a CUE claim to get my "S" since this was around the time that it became known you could get S if you had total plus 60%. If I had not filed I would still be waiting and wondering. The VA has tried to limit their liability in these total plus 60% cases I think. Teac told me about it and he has not got his and Phil has been trying to get it for years since when he got 100% they should have considered him for "S" at that time. They will swear they did, but there is no written proof that most 100% vets were ever considered for S without have 100% plus 60%. Also some DX'es are sign posts for a "S" rating.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

They will swear they did, but there is no written proof that most 100% vets were ever considered for S without have 100% plus 60%. Also "some DX'es are sign posts for a "S" rating. "

John is right. That is the initial basis of the CUE claim I won.

The veteran (my husband) was 100% P & T due to SC PTSD.

He had other disabilities that fell under Section 1151 ( now AO disabilties too)

In a 1998 decision the VA failed to consider him properly for SMC. His CVA under Section 1151 was rated (incorrectly) at 80% (changed to 100% 1151 in the decision)

His 1151 IHD, that VA never rated at all in the 1998 decision, and should have rated , was awarded under Nehmer instead of 1151 last month.

.

SMC is a statuatory benefit by mandate.I sent them an excerpt from the VBM as well as M21-1MR to prove that.

It is basic VA 101 that VA MUST consider eligibiity to SMC whenever the disabilities warrant it to be considered.I mean the disabilities have to have been established by VA

The mandate doesnt say they Must award, it says they must consider it , and if they fail to do that, that is a clear and unmistakable error if you can also prove that their error prevented you from attaining SMC.

Edited by Berta

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

The mandate doesnt say they Must award, it says they must consider it , and if they fail to do that, that is a clear and unmistakable error if you can also prove that their error prevented you from attaining SMC.

,I'm glad you brought that up Berta, thats interesting. So what your saying above is, if in the Reasons & Bases section of the decision letter, it has to state SMC was considered, or stated in another reasonable matter, and if it is not noted, therefore you have credible evidence for an NOD or CUE. Am I to understand this correctly Berta or John.

!!!BROKEN ARROW!!!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • HadIt.com Elder

coot - that is correct. There should be a statement of "some kind," in the reasons and bases" section, as to why SMC was not awarded. I believe, technically, it is a claim that remains "open" and therefore not a CUE. Remember this is only when the claimant is awarded a 100% schedular rating, for one disability and not a combined total of 100%. I would send the VA a letter requesting the status of the inferred SMC issue claim. jmo

pr

The mandate doesnt say they Must award, it says they must consider it , and if they fail to do that, that is a clear and unmistakable error if you can also prove that their error prevented you from attaining SMC.

,I'm glad you brought that up Berta, thats interesting. So what your saying above is, if in the Reasons & Bases section of the decision letter, it has to state SMC was considered, or stated in another reasonable matter, and if it is not noted, therefore you have credible evidence for an NOD or CUE. Am I to understand this correctly Berta or John.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Thanks PR, and yes I did forget this is only for 100% schedular for one disability. That makes a big difference.

Coot

!!!BROKEN ARROW!!!

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
      Week One Done
    • spazbototto earned a badge
      Week One Done
    • Paul Gretza earned a badge
      Week One Done
    • Troy Spurlock went up a rank
      Community Regular
    • KMac1181 earned a badge
      Week One Done
  • Our picks

    • These decisions have made a big impact on how VA disability claims are handled, giving veterans more chances to get benefits and clearing up important issues.

      Service Connection

      Frost v. Shulkin (2017)
      This case established that for secondary service connection claims, the primary service-connected disability does not need to be service-connected or diagnosed at the time the secondary condition is incurred 1. This allows veterans to potentially receive secondary service connection for conditions that developed before their primary condition was officially service-connected. 

      Saunders v. Wilkie (2018)
      The Federal Circuit ruled that pain alone, without an accompanying diagnosed condition, can constitute a disability for VA compensation purposes if it results in functional impairment 1. This overturned previous precedent that required an underlying pathology for pain to be considered a disability.

      Effective Dates

      Martinez v. McDonough (2023)
      This case dealt with the denial of an earlier effective date for a total disability rating based on individual unemployability (TDIU) 2. It addressed issues around the validity of appeal withdrawals and the consideration of cognitive impairment in such decisions.

      Rating Issues

      Continue Reading on HadIt.com
      • 0 replies
    • I met with a VSO today at my VA Hospital who was very knowledgeable and very helpful.  We decided I should submit a few new claims which we did.  He told me that he didn't need copies of my military records that showed my sick call notations related to any of the claims.  He said that the VA now has entire military medical record on file and would find the record(s) in their own file.  It seemed odd to me as my service dates back to  1981 and spans 34 years through my retirement in 2015.  It sure seemed to make more sense for me to give him copies of my military medical record pages that document the injuries as I'd already had them with me.  He didn't want my copies.  Anyone have any information on this.  Much thanks in advance.  
      • 4 replies
    • 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.   
×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

Guidelines and Terms of Use