Opinion On Hardship Request To Va To Speed Up Claim

[retiredat44]

Opinion on hardship request to VA to speed up claim.

I filed on basis of health hardship. I would like to now if others have experience on hardship claims...

I see people 'mention' either financial, or health.. or both..

My question has more to do with the type of health issues that the VA might take serious and speed up an appeal...

Has anyone gotten a claim sped up througha hrdship claim?

While I suffer from a fatal disease that is killing me, but with no date when it will either kill me or send me back into a hospital bed. The surgeons told me my prognosis is poor, and that is only one of my health problems.. They just don't know when it going to happen... but necrotizing pancreas disease if usally fatal, within several years.. I also have many other complications cysts on the pancreas, the tissue is dying.. and I have thrombosis of the splenic vein.. my blood prossure can drop suddenly, and it has in the past sending me into the hospital by ambulance with sirens. The splenic vein is partially clogged, and if a clog breaks loose it can go into my heart or brain...

If someone has asay terminal cancer and is given a few months to live, they might file a hardship to speed their claim,, one difference is I don't have a date when...

but it is factually true that my disease has no cure and it is fatal.. plus I have several other health issues that are serious.. with long hospitalizations, on record...

along with hospitalizations tha that happened on active duty 30 years ago..

Do to other disabled Veterans Opinions on hardship requests, to the VA to speed up claims, do you think my request is enough to move them, or do you think they ignore a request unless you only have a solid diagnosis of only a few months to live.. Is my hardship enough?

I have read a lot of opinions about hardship requests,, and there are basically to opinions...

1)they help speed up the requests

2)the claim 'c-file' is pulled and then shuffled to the bottom of the deck and you actually lose your space and go nowhere with the hardship claim..

Of course I am financially screwed, have been for 20 years.., since I have bene usnable to work for 20 years,, and am on SSDI for permanent disability. But my Hardship request is for the health issues.

I am hoping there are opnions for people who have actually filed hardship requests and eithe got a repsonse or didn't get a response. Also, that it was a spereate paper I gave them a hardship request for my claim top be sped up... and only last thing, I waited intil more than 3 years has passed since my claim was file and 1.5 years since my DRO hearing and no decision. So, I did not just ge tupset after a short time.. I waited several years to give them plenty of time to do the right thing.. my request is that I want them to speed up my claim beofre I either die or become incapacitated. I do have a history of not being able to care for myself for long periods of time, and it will happen again... So, that is the short verison of my reason.

Do those with experience think what I did is right, and do you think it wil speed up my claim?

Also, I gave my hardship letter info to my congressmans office to look into my claim delay... and while the conressman isn't going to directly help, his staff will.

I already asked in other threads about this and some people said it just shuffles you stack to the bottom, other threads in Veerans forums say it helps.. But, like I said, I am asking about if the request on the bais of health issues helps..

Thanx..

I am looking forward to hearing from those with experience...

If it makes any difference, it is the San Diego office.

(yes I read some of those reports of which offices have the largest workloads..)

Edited June 3, 2012 by retiredat44

[retiredat44]

On 6/3/2012 at 11:52 AM, john999 said:

If you think about it everyone who is out of work due to SC issue is a hardship case. Where do they begin except to speed up all claims. How many vets can go 6 months without a paycheck? Waiting on disability is a great way to lose weight. I lost 20 lbs and I got other disability really fast from workers' compensation etc. I did not have serious money problem just worried to death about "what now?". VA did turn me into a OCD case. I always believe that some piece of paper is either going to ruin me or save me so I save it all.

 

On 6/4/2012 at 11:24 AM, retiredat44 said:

That has got to be the truest statement ever... think of every paper you could not find that would have saved your arse..

I don't think anything is more true, or it is at the top of the list..

 

 

 

[retiredat44]

I was trying to go through my papers, still haven't read them all, even after the years going by,, these break my heart and rip me apart.. my records of hell. Finding the golden paper is elusive, I found a few jewels, but with the VA they need a paper that bludgeons them. I remember clearly doctors saying things that I need on paper, because the VA refuses to believe anyone about anything,, probably because they thrive on making liars out of everyone that applies...

[Berta]

Steve , your recent post got lost on page one-

Sometime around 2010 or 2011, I wrote the 1151 claim for you.

It was and still is one of the best 1151 claims I had ever seen.

This is part of a 2012 post I made to you- there were manybefore and after that regarding the 1151 claim:

 "On 6/27/2012 at 9:19 AM, Berta said:

Carlie- the prime disability of Necrotizing pancreatitis has never been claimed.

 

I studied as much as I could find years ago on this disability. It is not the same as a generic claim for chronic pancreatitis.

Not the same thing at all.It can be fatal as Retiredat44 has told us.

 

 

 

In the partial SOC Retriredat44 posted here years at hadit it stated:

“The VA examina

This excerpt from a lawyer's web site says:

 

“Endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography (ERCP) remains the most common cause of iatrogenic pancreatitis [1]. Studies have shown post-ERCP complications were responsible for greater than 65 percent of malpractice claims [2, 3]. “

 

http://americanmedic...ctice-case.html

 

Th term “Iatrogenic”means caused by a doctor or medical procedure.

 

I have read retired's IMO, the parts that were posted here long ago, and in my opinion, the IMO holds nothing to help his pending claim and the VA has already fully considered it.(possibly for the migraine claim but I still dont know the basis for that award.)

tion shows a diagnosis of status post necrotizing pancreatitis secondary

 

to endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography with residual chronic pancreatitis. “

 

(That's right folks- the VA admittd in the SOC that the ERCP caused the necrotising pancreatitis)

Both VA patients as well as private hosp patients have  bad results from the ERCP

In that older post I added:

"A good veteran's lawyer will see the prime issue of this claim right away.,an issue that has never been claimed properly yet .

 

If they don't see it right away -and I cant see how they can miss it, in my opinion- they are NOT a good veteran's lawyer."

https://community.hadit.com/topic/39333-got-the-white-envelope-today-denied/page/6/ote

Your Fuel exposure claim's IMO will never help that claim or the 1151 claim- in my opinion.

We have discussed the 1151 claim here and even your VA doctor, in one of the posts you made , agreed that the VA caused the necrotising pancreatitis.

I regret what you are still going through.

You need a solid independent medical opinion (probably an IME and not an IMO)to support the 1151. You really do not need a lawyer because a good lawyer would suggest that as well.

Your VSO changed the one I wrote here  in 2010-2011 for you- I dont know why or how it was changed- I am a successful 1151er and know what these claims involve. 

I think you are on a remand. I have no experience in hardship claims- but I know how to win 1151 claims.

However this is my last post on your 1151 issue. The first post was sometime in 2010 or 2011 here.

I regret I dont have the time to repeat the older advise I gave.

An IMO IME  from a real doctor with full exteptise in this type of disability will give your medical records the best consideration they wille  ever get.

I suggest that you give any IMO/IME doctor a copy of my reply here....and a copy of the 1151 claim, as well.

I dont know if I have a copy of what I wrote for you but it can be serched for here.

I cant open this link to one of your posts here - my PC does not work well when I am in a cloud:

https://community.hadit.com/topic/index.php?/topic/48047-today-my-gi-doctor-blamed-teh-va-for-my-necrotizing-pancreatits/

 

 

 

Edited April 8, 2019 by Berta
added more

[Berta]

I assume this might be your remand:

in part:

"With respect to the issue of entitlement to compensation based on the provisions of 38 U.S.C.A. § 1151 for a pancreas procedure or surgery complications, to include necrotizing pancreatitis disease, splenic vein thrombosis, muscle wasting, shaking, tremors, and inability to walk, a VA examiner in August 2016 opined that the Veteran's chronic pancreatitis was not due to negligence from VA treatment. 08/17/2016 VA Examination (DBQ Medical Opinion), at 8. However, it is not clear from the VA examination whether the chronic pancreatitis was due to an event not reasonably foreseeable. The August 2016 VA examiner remarked that the "resultant complications . . . are known sequelae of such interventions," but in the same examination she also stated that the chronic pancreatitis developed "as a result of events [that] were not reasonably foreseeable." Id. (emphases added). Accordingly, the Board finds that an additional addendum is necessary to obtain a clarification as to whether the Veteran's chronic pancreatitis was due to an event not reasonably foreseeable. Additionally, on remand, outstanding, pertinent VA treatment records should be obtained.

Accordingly, the case is REMANDED for the following actions: (This appeal has been advanced on the Board's docket pursuant to 38 C.F.R. § 20.900(c). Expedited handling is requested.)"

https://www.va.gov/vetapp17/files6/1732184.txt

There was a lot more to the remand.

This is key-

"However, it is not clear from the VA examination whether the chronic pancreatitis was due to an event not reasonably foreseeable. The August 2016 VA examiner remarked that the "resultant complications . . . are known sequelae of such interventions," but in the same examination she also stated that the chronic pancreatitis developed "as a result of events [that] were not reasonably foreseeable." Id. (emphases added). Accordingly, the Board finds that an additional addendum is necessary to obtain a clarification as to whether the Veteran's chronic pancreatitis was due to an event not reasonably foreseeable. Additionally, on remand, outstanding, pertinent VA treatment records should be obtained."

The complication of necrotising pancreatitis was due to the actual ERCP. This would be th focus of any IMO/IME doctor-

"The August 2016 VA examiner remarked that the "resultant complications . . . are known sequelae of such interventions,"    yeah that is why many lawsuits occurred.

As I my past posts and research I posted here long ago-doctors were not performing this procedure correctly.

"Accordingly, the case is REMANDED for the following actions: (This appeal has been advanced on the Board's docket pursuant to 38 C.F.R. § 20.900(c). Expedited handling is requested.)"   August 2017 BVA decision.

I dont know if that expedited sttement is due to hardship-maybe it is the same thing.

There was a lot more to the remand, and this is one reason why it is taking so long.

[retiredat44]

On 4/8/2019 at 6:13 AM, Berta said:

I assume this might be your remand:

in part:

"With respect to the issue of entitlement to compensation based on the provisions of 38 U.S.C.A. § 1151 for a pancreas procedure or surgery complications, to include necrotizing pancreatitis disease, splenic vein thrombosis, muscle wasting, shaking, tremors, and inability to walk, a VA examiner in August 2016 opined that the Veteran's chronic pancreatitis was not due to negligence from VA treatment. 08/17/2016 VA Examination (DBQ Medical Opinion), at 8. However, it is not clear from the VA examination whether the chronic pancreatitis was due to an event not reasonably foreseeable. The August 2016 VA examiner remarked that the "resultant complications . . . are known sequelae of such interventions," but in the same examination she also stated that the chronic pancreatitis developed "as a result of events [that] were not reasonably foreseeable." Id. (emphases added). Accordingly, the Board finds that an additional addendum is necessary to obtain a clarification as to whether the Veteran's chronic pancreatitis was due to an event not reasonably foreseeable. Additionally, on remand, outstanding, pertinent VA treatment records should be obtained.

Accordingly, the case is REMANDED for the following actions: (This appeal has been advanced on the Board's docket pursuant to 38 C.F.R. § 20.900(c). Expedited handling is requested.)"

https://www.va.gov/vetapp17/files6/1732184.txt

There was a lot more to the remand.

This is key-

"However, it is not clear from the VA examination whether the chronic pancreatitis was due to an event not reasonably foreseeable. The August 2016 VA examiner remarked that the "resultant complications . . . are known sequelae of such interventions," but in the same examination she also stated that the chronic pancreatitis developed "as a result of events [that] were not reasonably foreseeable." Id. (emphases added). Accordingly, the Board finds that an additional addendum is necessary to obtain a clarification as to whether the Veteran's chronic pancreatitis was due to an event not reasonably foreseeable. Additionally, on remand, outstanding, pertinent VA treatment records should be obtained."

The complication of necrotising pancreatitis was due to the actual ERCP. This would be th focus of any IMO/IME doctor-

"The August 2016 VA examiner remarked that the "resultant complications . . . are known sequelae of such interventions,"    yeah that is why many lawsuits occurred.

As I my past posts and research I posted here long ago-doctors were not performing this procedure correctly.

"Accordingly, the case is REMANDED for the following actions: (This appeal has been advanced on the Board's docket pursuant to 38 C.F.R. § 20.900(c). Expedited handling is requested.)"   August 2017 BVA decision.

I dont know if that expedited sttement is due to hardship-maybe it is the same thing.

There was a lot more to the remand, and this is one reason why it is taking so long.

Update:

Hi,

The VA GI clinic that did my pancreas operation and procedures, where I Lived for 6 months wrote an IMO, that states the complications 'more likely than not' caused by the procedure (cutting the billary tube while doing a fine needle aspiration) at the VA. I wrote a letter to a doctor who saw me every day for 6 months and it turned out he had moved, but then the clinic contacted me back and told me they would write an IMO for me. So they sent it, I sent it to the BVA judge a couple months back. FYI

I also sent the judge (a year ago, a doctor statement from a dental surgeon that the teeth were destroyed by intestinal disease.) The BVA judge had asked why I didn't get help by the VA, I told him I tried many times but was told no and to leave.

Might be more, but for now...

so, the BVA judge is working on the decisions, and no longer is anything in remand.

Steven

Edited July 29, 2019 by retiredat44

[retiredat44]

On 6/4/2012 at 11:40 AM, john999 said:

Retiredat44

 

 

I found a piece of paper and based on that paper I filed a CUE. I hope that piece of paper will pay me. I am trying to find some medical notes that I know existed in 1971. I don't know if they exist today. They were mentioned in prelude to a courts martial, so I know they once existed. It might help me in another fight I am getting ready to start. A very careful reading of your C-File is the place to start especially if you have an old case. In the old cases they just ignored evidence and excluded what they did not agree with which is violation of due process and possible CUE.

I took some papers out of my files, that I had already sent them, when new, and again sent them in and the judge counted them as new evidence, some of these papers are 20 years old... they just never read what I gave them..