I am curious about a certain section in title 10 usc. From how this reads, anyone that has been medically seperated since 9/11 would not have to pay back their severance pay as long as they have the National Defense Service Medal.(red highlighted portion)
The way I see it, if someone got the National Defense Sevice Medal after 9/11 they were part of the operations pertaining to the war on terror.(green highlighted portion)
If I am in fact reading this right, the VA should not be deducting my monthly check since I had surgery in 2006 while still on active duty. It didn't fix anything(made it worse) and was seperated in 2007. So my condtion was aggravated/worsened in 2006 during the war on terror, therefore the VA deducted money from me contrary to what this statute says.
(d)
(1)The amount of disability severance pay received under this section shall be deducted from any compensation for the same disability to which the former member of the armed forces or his dependents become entitled under any law administered by the Department of Veterans Affairs.
(2)No deduction may be made under paragraph (1) in the case of disability severance pay received by a member for a disability incurred in line of duty in a combat zone or incurred during performance of duty in combat-related operations as designated by the Secretary of Defense.
Criteria It is awarded for honorable active military service as a member of the armed forces of the United States including the Coast Guard, between June 27, 1950 and July 27, 1954, (Korean War), between Jan. 1, 1961 and Aug. 14, 1974, (Vietnam War), between Aug. 2, 1990 to Nov. 30, 1995 (operations Desert Shield and Desert Storm), and currently from Sept. 11, 2001 to a date to be determined (terrorism attacks on the United States). Service members who earned the medal during the first qualifying period, and who again became entitled to the medal, wear a bronze star on the ribbon to denote the second award of the medal.
BTW, I was actually there. I'm not trying to cheat the system. But a lot of people could if how I am reading this is true. Any thoughts on how this statute is written? Or if this seems to possibly have large legal ramifications for the VA and severance deductions?
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”
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.
However, (and I have no idea of knowing whether or not you would likely succeed) Im unsure of why you seem to be so adamant against getting an increase in disability compensation.
When I buy stuff, say at Kroger, or pay bills, I have never had anyone say, "Wait! Is this money from disability compensation, or did you earn it working at a regular job?" Not once. Thus, if you did get an increase, likely you would have no trouble paying this with the increase compensation.
However, there are many false rumors out there that suggest if you apply for an increase, the VA will reduce your benefits instead.
That rumor is false but I do hear people tell Veterans that a lot. There are strict rules VA has to reduce you and, NOT ONE of those rules have anything to do with applying for an increase.
Yes, the VA can reduce your benefits, but generally only when your condition has "actually improved" under ordinary conditions of life.
Unless you contacted the VA within 72 hours of your medical treatment, you may not be eligible for reimbursement, or at least that is how I read the link, I posted above. Here are SOME of the rules the VA must comply with in order to reduce your compensation benefits:
NOTE: TO PROVE CAUSE OF DEATH WILL LIKELY REQUIRE AN AUTOPSY. This means if you die of a SC condtion, your spouse would need to do an autopsy to prove cause of death to be from a SC condtiond. If you were P and T for 10 full years, then the cause of death may not matter so much.
Question
starving030
I am curious about a certain section in title 10 usc. From how this reads, anyone that has been medically seperated since 9/11 would not have to pay back their severance pay as long as they have the National Defense Service Medal.(red highlighted portion)
The way I see it, if someone got the National Defense Sevice Medal after 9/11 they were part of the operations pertaining to the war on terror.(green highlighted portion)
If I am in fact reading this right, the VA should not be deducting my monthly check since I had surgery in 2006 while still on active duty. It didn't fix anything(made it worse) and was seperated in 2007. So my condtion was aggravated/worsened in 2006 during the war on terror, therefore the VA deducted money from me contrary to what this statute says.
BTW, I was actually there. I'm not trying to cheat the system. But a lot of people could if how I am reading this is true. Any thoughts on how this statute is written? Or if this seems to possibly have large legal ramifications for the VA and severance deductions?
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Top Posters For This Question
3
1
1
Popular Days
Sep 19
5
Sep 18
1
Top Posters For This Question
apachegirl 3 posts
Philip Rogers 1 post
starving030 1 post
Popular Days
Sep 19 2013
5 posts
Sep 18 2013
1 post
5 answers to this question
Recommended Posts
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 accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now