tinnitus Denied Again

[frosty69]

I was denied again for Tinnitus, bilateral hearing loss, bilateral otitis externa, and upper respiratory infection.

I have medical records in service to prove otitis externa, and upper respiratory infection, but that isn't good enough, and have suffer with UPI ever since, although, don't go to a doctor every time I have the symptoms, as I learned to live with them, and never even considered that I could get service connected for it, until about a year ago, hence no medical records, except at the VA, tinnitus in a coin toss, what I have read on the BVA site for veterans cases, some get approved and some don't with the same evidence I have, some if you have been in combat and around loud noises, they get granted, others get denied. Oh well, will be appealing all to the BVA anyway, what gets me, is that statement, no new eviedence, so claim is denied, trouble is they never look at all the evidence, hence keep submitting the same evidence until they learn to read it all.

[foreveryoung]

Have you ever going to the Doctor at all for this over the years?

If you have a local Doctor who you feel would be willing to examing you and review your medical records thats a start. See if he will give you an opinion that your current condition could be related to what is stated in your military records.

Use that statement an attach it to your NOD.

Good Luck.

[Guest terrysturgis]

Frosty, I started my Tinnitus claim with an outside audio exam and a letter that stated that the Tinnitus and hearing loss is "as likely as not to be service connected". My first SO from the VFW suggested it and sent me to an audio specialist that had dealt with the VA lingo before. At the time I was covered under my wife's insurance and they paid for the exam. The other thing I presented as evidence was a tape I made in Viet Nam and sent to my wife. I can't tell you why I still had a copy of it but I do. Sometimes your MOS will help your claim. I was a 36C20, telephone man but in Nam I was assigned to calibrate artillery. 105's, 155 and 175 MM. My exit exam, that I did not know I had upon discharge, also showed hearing loss. Just a few ideas that worked for me that you can maybe try on your NOD. Good luck. Terry Sturgis

[Vike17]

frosty69,

I don't think you can receive seperate ratings for hearing loss and otitis externa, as this would probably be pyrmiading because they both involve the same etology. The VA would assign a rating for the most disabiling condition and take into condsideration the other disability when assigning the percentage.

"I have medical records in service to prove otitis externa, and upper respiratory infection, but that isn't good enough, and have suffer with UPI ever since, although, don't go to a doctor every time I have the symptoms"

If your SMR's show only one or two infections over a period of a number of years of service, the VA has no choice but to deny service-connection. Your SMR's must show a "chronic" condition in service, or you must be able to show continuity of treatment of after discharge. You stated that you never went to the doctor for UPI or your ears since the military. In this case you'll need a good IMO from your doctor to show a nexus! One thing to remember, the VA can only grant service-connection, for the most part, when there is evidence of a residual to your claimed disability. In your case it sounds like the thing missing in your claim is an IMO connectiong the dots.

"what I have read on the BVA site for veterans cases, some get approved and some don't with the same evidence I have"

BVA cases do not set a presedence.

"what gets me, is that statement, no new eviedence, so claim is denied, trouble is they never look at all the evidence, hence keep submitting the same evidence until they learn to read it all"

If you are trying to re-open this case, you must submit "New and Material" evidence, which means evidence that VA did not have before them when they previously made their decision, and evidence that bare directly on the issue at hand. It is a good possibility that the evidence you previously sent in wasn't afforded the weight you thought it should receive from the RVSR. In this case its a judgmental call on the rater. Now if that evidence wasn't listed in any reason or basis on any prior decisions, then you can resubmit that eveidence as "new" because they apparently didn't take it into consideration.

Vike 17

[Berta]

YEAH- Excellent point Vike-

"Now if that evidence wasn't listed in any reason or basis on any prior decisions, then you can resubmit that eveidence as "new" because they apparently didn't take it into consideration"

I think many vets often overlook what you just stated-

And if they get to the BVA point-that "New" and unconsidered evidence should be stated as such, again, right on page one of the I-9-and even attached to the I-9----just in case they have lost it at the VARO.

[Guest fla_viking]

Dear Fellow Veteran & Friends

I read a court ruling stating the VA was not required to comment on every documnet in the C file. The court ruled that if documents were in the C file at the time of decission. Then the VA has reviewed them even if the VA did not comment on them.

You will not suceed at the court level if you think resubmitting documents to the VA that has already been before them and denied just because they dont offically reconize them in a ruling.

The best way to get those documents commented on is to have a new medical opnion stating what the VA refuses to acknowlege in there review of your claims. If the VA dont see the new medical opnion as accumlitive, Then the court can review the documents as new and material evidence.

Terry Higgins

[Vike17]

Terry,

"I read a court ruling stating the VA was not required to comment on every documnet in the C file. The court ruled that if documents were in the C file at the time of decission. Then the VA has reviewed them even if the VA did not comment on them"

Yes, I believe you're correct, normally, if there is a ton of evidence that the rater needs to go through and evaluate, then they'll generally make a reference in the "evidence" section of the rating as "records from 1980 through 2006 were compltely reviewd," or soimething to that affect. However, if I'm not mistaken, if there is a certain piece if evidence that is of particular importance either for or against the veteran within the time frame lsited on a rating, then the rater must discuss that piece of evidence as to why or why not it was afforded such weight for or against the veteran.

Vike 17