Claim Advice For Others....

[rpowell01]

I want others to know from my experience that if you place a claim with the VA and have an IMO, do not send in the IMO until after the C&P exam is completed. From my current experience I just had the C&P examiner will do everything he/she can to rip you apart and will lie, lie, lie on the C&P exam....

[rdawg]

i had the opposite experience with one c&p and the same experience with another.

for sleep apnea the c&p dr agreed with my imo and internet articles. urinary did everything he could to shoot it down.

[manning01]

I had the same experience also. The 80 year old C&P doctor that was a internal medicine by trade tried everything he could to shoot down my two IMO's I had from the highly trained urology surgeons (Mayo Cancer Center) that performed my surgery and follow up treatment for my cancer. The RO went with this goof ball that is not trained in what these guys know and do and said this C&P examiner has more access to my C file and military medical records. My surgeons I gave them a full copy of my SMR's and it was even in the IMO but the RO sided with a over the hill internal medicine Dr that didn't even fill out the right DBQ the first for that exam and I had to go back a redo the exam due to his mistakes.

Edited May 24, 2013 by manning01

[carlie]

I had the same experience also. The 80 year old C&P doctor that was a internal medicine by trade tried everything he could to shoot down my two IMO's I had from the highly trained urology surgeons (Mayo Cancer Center) that performed my surgery and follow up treatment for my cancer. The RO went with this goof ball that is not trained in what these guys know and do and said this C&P examiner has more access to my C file and military medical records. My surgeons I gave them a full copy of my SMR's and it was even in the IMO but the RO sided with a over the hill internal medicine Dr that didn't even fill out the right DBQ the first for that exam and I had to go back a redo the exam due to his mistakes.

Was the BOD discussed in the Reasons and Bases Section ?

[manning01]

Was the BOD discussed in the Reasons and Bases Section ?

What the RO said was that the VA examiners opinion had more evidentiary weight due to the VA medical examiner has access to my entire C file and SMRs and considered a complete evidenece of record. Also the C&P examiner stated and that this is a diagnosable disease with a partial explained etiology. There is no evidence that the private examiners had the benefit of review of your entire claims file, service treatment records nor the history documented in the claims folder. So I guess my cancer that is not related to my 21 years exposure to hazourdous chemicals working on aircraft, exposure to the Balad Burn Pit, Kirkuk Oil Field Fires, Hydrazine, Chronium, Zink Chromate, JP-4/5/8 and the VA was the ones that found it 1 months after my retirement from the USAF. I was not going to let them touch me for treatment so I went to the Mayo Clinic under my private insurance. Funny when two high respected Urology Surgeons in the Phoenix AZ area are deamed less creditable than a C&P exmainer with no urology cancer background. The two Surgeons even put in their IMOs that my cancer was due to all the toxic chemical exposures, they put where they could link thier opinions from and all the documents, journals etc reviewed and they clearly stated they reviewed my copy of my SMR's, buddy statements, MSDS's workplace listings from my last two Air Force duty locations etc....

[Notorious Kelly]

I'm sure it's a dart throw.

I gave C & P doc evidence I had already submitted (that wasn't in my file he got) and he said, "It's good that you brought this."

I appreciate people giving helpful advice but I'm afraid each of our experiences can be a different 'witches brew'

[Berta]

In my opinion (from personal experience with IMOs for my 2003 DMII AO death claim),

a copy of the C & P results, if negative, has great value , when a real IMO doctor with expertise in the field of the disability, opines on the claim and then can opine as to why the examiner was wrong.

In my case Dr. Bash clearly stated in his second IMO for my DMII claim that the statements in the SOC ,taken from the C & P, (maybe it was the SSOC by then) were medically inaccurate and told the VA why.

Also, unlike the VA Endocrinologist who did the C & P exam, he stated he had extensive experience reading the MRIs ,X rays, etc of "thousands" of veterans ,with heart and brain trauma due to diabetes, and based a rationale on that point as well.

I had done extensive medical research prior to even contacting Dr. Bash for this claim, because it was an additional malpractice issue but I could not FTCA them nor file a 1151 claim twice for the same malpracticed death.

The claim was for diabetes mellitus,undiagnosed and untreated by VA, from AO, which had contributed to my husband's death.

VA had already admitted they caused his death due to malpractice on other conditions.

In your case VA said :

"There is no evidence that the private examiners had the benefit of review of your entire claims file, service treatment records nor the history documented in the claims folder"

You stated:

"The two Surgeons even put in their IMOs that my cancer was due to all the toxic chemical exposures, they put where they could link thier opinions from and all the documents, journals etc reviewed and they clearly stated they reviewed my copy of my SMR's, buddy statements, MSDS's workplace listings from my last two Air Force duty locations etc...."

In my opinion , this is an evidentary CUE ,committed by the VA, under 38 CFR 4.6.

Your SMRs and other documents, in my opinion, for a claim like this, had more value than the C file to the opiner.

As long as you are within the appellate period , you can request that the VA call a CUE on itself and ,hopefully, render a proper decision.

It would be good if you can get a VSO or vet rep to support you on this.

I wish I had used this tactic for my 2003 DMII claim .That claim took almost 7 years to be awarded.

The BVA was the only VA entity to even acknowledge my IMOs. I have since been successful getting VA to CUE itself and have another CUE pending.

Here is part of what I posted here last year and can be used as a template for this type of collteral attack on an illegal RO decision.

Others here might disagree with this tactic but it has been working for me.

This tactic is only pertinent if the evidence is Probative, which yours certainly is.

VA 800 told me the RO obtained evidence in March but couldn't tell me what claim it was for as I have 2 pending.I do believe it was for the CUE request I made.

“.Posted 19 January 2013 - 08:44 AM

This is part of my recent CUE issue pending that can be used as a template:

Department of Veterans Affairs October 28,2012
Philadelphia Regional Office
PO Box 8079
Philadelphia ,Pa. 19101 Re: 310/3POST/CG
Nehmer decision dated January 17,2012

C # XX XXX XXX

and
Department of Veterans Affairs Original Agency of Jurisdiction
Regional Office
130 South Elmwood Avenue
Suite 601
Buffalo, N. Y. 14202 2478


REQUEST FOR VA TO CUE ITSELF REGARDING PART OF THEIR JANUARY 17^th 2012 DECISION

I was advised by NVLSP to send my correspondence to both above VAROs to determine who holds jurisdiction over this request .

I respectfully request the VA to call a clear and unmistakable error on part of the above January 17,2012 decision from the Philadelphia VARO and to correct it.

This is a separate issue from my recent Section 1151,38 USC claim filed with the Buffalo VARO on September 21, 2012.

I state that the VA failed to apply the basic concepts and evidentary requirements of 38 USC, Chapter One, Part 4, Subpart A, under 4.6 et al, thus:
“Every element in any way affecting the probative value to be assigned to the evidence in each individual claim must be thoroughly and conscientiously studied by each member of the rating board in the light of the established policies of the Department of Veterans Affairs to the end that decisions will be equitable and just as contemplated by the requirements of the law. “

I sent considerable evidence with this request proving they are wrong and failed to apply the above most basic VA concept,well established by VA case law, and which has never changed or been amended in any way whatsoever.

This regarded only one statement in my Nehmer award letter but ironically it was the statement that held the highest monetary retro value,if it had been correct. I enclosed with this request a list of and copies of all of the documented evidence VA has had in their possession for years,that warranted a much higher retro award and proper disability rating.

Only one document was in VA's possession but not mine, as I recall.

Each document could stand alone as probative to the CUE request.

This bears repeating:

I state that the VA failed to apply the basic concepts and evidentary requirements of 38 USC, Chapter One, Part 4, Subpart A, under 4.6 et al, thus:

“Every element in any way affecting the probative value to be assigned to the evidence in each individual claim must be thoroughly and conscientiously studied by each member of the rating board in the light of the established policies of the Department of Veterans Affairs to the end that decisions will be equitable and just as contemplated by the requirements of the law. “

VA is bound by 38 CFR as much as we claimants are.

Edited May 25, 2013 by Berta