diabetes One More Question On Death Of Veteran While Claim At Bva

[derenick52]

HEY ALL,THANKS FOR THE INPUT ON MY POST THE OTHER DAY ON INFO FOR WIDOW-SUBSTITUTION,ETC,SO HIS CLAIM AT BVA IS FOR DIABETES,HE DIED FROM LUNG CANCER ANOTHER AGENT ORANGE MEDICAL CONDITION WHICH WAS JUST DIAGNOSED A WEEK BEFORE HIS DEATH-DOES HIS WIDOW HAVE ANY RECOURSE ON THE LUNG CANCER ISSUE OR IS IT MUTE AS HE HAS PASSED ON-? THANKS TO ALL YOUR HEROES

[Philip Rogers]

HEY ALL,SO MY FRIENDS WIDOW RECEIVED THE AUTOPSY REPORT LAST WEEK-THE LUNG CANCER WAS FROM MESOTHELIOMA FROM ASBESTOS EXPOSURE ABOARD SHIP,WAS A MACHINIST MATE,SHE IS HIRING A ATTORNEY FOR A LAWSUIT ON THE TRUST FUND SET UP FOR THEM-QUESTION-CAN SHE FILE FOR DIC IN REGARDS TO THIS CAUSE OF DEATH-SHE IS FILING THE FORM FOR SUBSTITUTION FOR THE AGENT ORANGE CLAIM AT BVA,ANY ADVICE APPRECIATED,THANKS,GEORGE

You should tell her to shop around for Meso lawyers, as the percentage they take can be reduced. Most charge between 30% - 40%, so she should dicker w/them going for the lowest rate. They generally hook themselves to one of the biggees, like Sokolove, on these, and ride on their coat tails. If the death is very recent and unexpected, she may not be in the best state of mind to deal w/this. jmo

pr

[Berta]

QUESTION-CAN SHE FILE FOR DIC IN REGARDS TO THIS CAUSE OF DEATH-SHE IS FILING THE FORM FOR SUBSTITUTION FOR THE AGENT ORANGE CLAIM AT BVA,ANY ADVICE APPRECIATED,THANKS,GEORGE “

I am glad I came back and read this again----

I didnt realize this was the same widow you had mentioned before.

Apparently the veteran had filed a claim under AO presumptives? And this is the claim at the BVA?

However the autopsy revealed a different type of lung cancer, caused by asbestos?

It seems to me there might be no accrued benefits ,as that claim was based on AO lung cancer and is now a moot issue.

You said the autopsy revealed MESOTHELIOMA .

I am wondering why he was not diagnosed with this specific form of cancer much sooner.Mesothelioma has been in the news on TV so many times, he could have taken steps sooner to proceed either with a Meso lawsuit or a VA claim filed on his exact diagnosis due to asbestos exposure instead of AO and perhaps gotten a VA award letter before died.

Was his medical treatment all from the VA?

I suggest the widow should obtain all of his medical records.

There might be more to this then meets the eye.

When did he die?

Can the widow come and join us here?

I suggest she get not only a good lawyer but also have the lawyer consider any potential of FTCA regarding his VA health care..

This Navy vet got 12 million:

http://www.waterskraus.com/index.aspx?id=news_cundiffverdict

in part;

“LOS ANGELES - May 11, 2009 - An LA County jury has awarded $12.006 million to a U.S. Navy serviceman who was exposed to asbestos during a single tour of duty in the early 1960s.

The plaintiff in the case is Charles H. Cundiff, a 66-year-old retired truck driver who is terminally ill with malignant pleural mesothelioma. Mesothelioma is an insidious disease with a singel known cause: asbestos exposure. Mr. Cundiff's exposure occurred during his time as a machinist's mate aboard the USS Kitty Hawk from 1962 to 1966.”

I have no idea if this vet filed a VA claim as well.

As long as the DIC claim is filed within one year of his death, the widow will receive DIC back to date of death,assuming the VA awards the DIC claim.

She might want to consider filing for both direct SC death as well as 1151 death if the VA provided his medical care but did not properly diagnose him with an asbestos type of cancer.

But that would depend on is VA medical records and it seems to me she would be eligible for DIC under the asbestos regulations.

[broncovet]

Yes, Berta I certainly agree that you should look at the death certificate and not automatically accept the widow's reasoning of why her hubby passed.

And, as you pointed out you will save yourself a lot of time by checking that before you file. In the Op's case, you pointed out a potential entitlement to meso benefits, which may be greater than available VA benefits. I think its entirely possible, or even likely, that Meso and VA benefits could both happen. For example, if the Veteran was stationed on board ship, where there was lots of asbestos, this exposure would both qualify the Vet for VA benefits, AND meso benefits. That is, unless the law precludes collecting both.

I see that very often with Vets, too. The Veteran will say xxxxx, but you read the decision, they will say yyyyyy. I think this is predicated not so much on dishonesty of the Veteran, or the widow, but, more likely, the Vet/widow either did not read or did not understand the decision.

[Philip Rogers]

For a Meso death she should be able to collect from many defendents, the VA included. The attys try to ID any products the claimant or decedent may have worked with or been exposed to and then they sue all of them. Many funds have been set up to settle claims and many companies have filed bankruptcy. She'll probably get settlements from all she can ID. jmo

pr

[Berta]

Philip ,I agree.

I mentioned in Social last week that I met a disabled veteran's widow at my car dealership while getting inspected etc.

I started to pull out a hadit card from my purse and asked her to join us if she needed any help with her DIC claim but she said she didnt use computers.

And she then told me she had succeeded in DIC in less than 2 years at Buffalo VARO (the same one I deal with)

and it was an asbestos claim.

She said she followed the VCAA letter and everything else they sent , exactly as written ,as to the evidence she needed and her daughter, who can handle PC, did some research, made copies she needed , etc etc.I got the impression they first denied and she succeeded by responding to the SOC with more evidence.

She also told me she was successful in a Meso lawsuit too regarding her husband's asbestos exposure.

Broncovet said:

"more likely, the Vet/widow either did not read or did not understand the decision"

This is by far, the most frustrating experience I have had, as a vets advocate,- in getting vets or widows to comprehend their decisions.

Broncovet, you certainly stated one of the main reasons claims are denied and then continue in the appeals process, often to be denied again.

What the VA states on paper,in their own words, is the key to what every claimant needs to overcome in their appeal.

I have learned not to try not to go by what a claimant says a VA letter says, because more often than not, they are parsing what VA really stated on paper.

I dont feel it is dishonesty either (although I have been victimized by 'stories' not borne out in any fact at all and wasted time on stuff like that-but it doesnt happen often)

It is simply that the veteran or survivor is not reading the decision properly as you said, and prior to any decision the VCAA letter sells out exactly what evidence the VA needs.

I wrote a VCAA letter to myself in 2003. The VCAA letter I got was a violation of the VCAA. And the BVA agreed with me.

I wrote down exactly what evidence, if I worked for the VA, that a proper VCAA letter should have asked for and this is what I sent to the VA.

My faulty VARO VCAA letter contained no Response form so the VA denied saying I never responded to what I never got.

The actual VCAA letter was absurd but I knew the BVA would grant the claim.

Still I could have asked them to CUE themselves on that letter and didnt.

Even my former vet reps and the Former director of their org told me it was a legit letter.

That bothers me a lot because how many other claimants they held POA for got that same BS.

They have all since left the POA or been demoted after I filed a OGC complaint on them.

I hate to ask claimants here to scan and post their reasons and bases because this takes up gigabits or something at this site.

Then again I see more and more lately at hadit where we, as advocates, are totally in the dark and have to make assumptions to give advise that is based on not knowing the actual words of the VA that led to their denial.

Certainly any good vet rep or vet's lawyer would hesitate to opine on what we say the VA said in a decision.

Edited July 11, 2012 by Berta