Jump to content

Sponsored Ads



  • Latest Donations

  • Advertisemnt

  • 14 Questions about VA Disability Compensation Benefits Claims

    questions-001@3x.png

    When a Veteran starts considering whether or not to file a VA Disability Claim, there are a lot of questions that he or she tends to ask. Over the last 10 years, the following are the 14 most common basic questions I am asked about ...
    Continue Reading
     
  • Ads

  • Most Common VA Disabilities Claimed for Compensation:   

    tinnitus-005.pngptsd-005.pnglumbosacral-005.pngscars-005.pnglimitation-flexion-knee-005.pngdiabetes-005.pnglimitation-motion-ankle-005.pngparalysis-005.pngdegenerative-arthitis-spine-005.pngtbi-traumatic-brain-injury-005.png

  • Advertisemnt

  • Advertisemnt

  • Ads

  • Can a 100 percent Disabled Veteran Work and Earn an Income?

    employment 2.jpeg

    You’ve just been rated 100% disabled by the Veterans Affairs. After the excitement of finally having the rating you deserve wears off, you start asking questions. One of the first questions that you might ask is this: It’s a legitimate question – rare is the Veteran that finds themselves sitting on the couch eating bon-bons … Continue reading

Sponsored Ads

  • Searches Community Forums, Blog and more

  • Donation Box

    Please donate to support the community.
    We appreciate all donations!
  • 0
jeeperrs

Bva With Remand To Amc

Question

I am new and posted much of what I am copy/pasting in another forum. However, I did not get much of a reply on that forum and thought I would try here. I will try to be as clear as I can, feel free to ask questions.

I will try to make this short and simple. I was discharged in 2003 for Supraventricular tachycardia. I found out after leaving the Army that they damaged my AV node and they took someone else's heart monitor and put my name on it (documented by VA cardiologist). The problem is that by putting my name on the other monitor and not my monitor, I received a 10% and not 30% rating in 2003. I have been fighting this for many years once a VA cardiologist pointed out the issue. I had a BVA hearing 2 years ago and just received my remand decision. I stressed the importance of the monitor that was miss identified and had a VA cardiologist document in 2009 that the heart monitor from 2003 was not my monitor and someone else's monitor. The judges remand said that I had to get current evidence, as that was too old of evidence for the increase in rating (she didn't once mention how I had false labs placed in my chart). This is my only issue that I have been fighting and I will post my timeline and then my questions. I have followed this board for 2 years but I can't seem to find an answer to this question, so I joined and am now posting.

Timeline (because I searched timelines all the time):

03/31/2009

Local VA Office Decision

RO

11/09/2009

Notice of Disagreement (NOD)

RO

11/16/2009

Appeal Pending

RO

03/17/2010

Statement of the Case (SOC)

RO

04/09/2010

Substantive Appeal (Form 9)

RO

01/11/2011

Supplemental Statement(s) of the Case (SSOC)

RO

07/27/2011

Certification of Appeal

RO

12/29/2011

Received by BVA

BVA

12/29/2011

Administrative Case Processing

BVA

10/15/2013

With VLJ

BVA

10/15/2013

With VLJ

BVA

10/23/2013

With VLJ

BVA

11/18/2013

With VLJ

BVA

11/19/2013

Pending Dispatch

BVA

11/19/2013

Decision & Claims File Dispatch

AMC

11/21/2013

Decision & Claims File Dispatch

AMC

Since it is now at the AMC you can all understand that I am in a remand.

My letter:

The Issue: Entitlement to a rating in excess of 10 percent for supraventricular tachycardia.

The introduction states:

This matter comes before the BVA on appeal from March 2009 rating decision issued by the VA RO in Muskogee, OK.

They had a quick review of my hearing and additional evidence

This paragraph was in bold and one of my questions (I was never seeking a secondary issue):

The issue of entitlement to service connection for degenerative mitral valve disease, to include as secondary to service-connected supraventricular tachycardia, has been raised by the record, but has not been adjudicated by the Agency of Original Jurisdiction (AOJ). Therefore, the board does not have jurisdiction over it, and it is referred to the AOJ for appropriate action.

The appeal is REMANDED to the RO via the AMC in Washington DC.

Questions:

1) Can I not do anything about them discharging me under false laboratory findings, as I have a VA cardiologist and private cardiologist that says that is not my heart monitor?

2) I did not ask for the mitral valve to be a secondary condition but additional evidence to the chronic supra ventricular tachycardia. Are they starting their own claim to make this a secondary issue? What date do they use, my appeal or the order date?

3) They want evidence between the time I filed the appeal (when I found out about the errors in my medical records) but also said in the remand that I am to have an examination. The issue is that I had way more recorded episodes when I left the army than they want to use. However, the VA has agreed to count 4 recorded episodes but I need 5 recorded episodes to get the increase I am seeking. The examination criteria says "It is left to the examiner's professional judgment whether the veteran needs to be monitored by ECG or Holger monitor to satisfactorily complete this examination." but the requirements the BVA stated earlier said I had to have 5 recorded episodes. Should I allow the doctor to submit an opinion or require the doctor to put a 30 day holter monitor on me? I can get the needed recordings if they put a 30 day monitor on me.

4) Should I get a lawyer at this point? I have use VFW thus far.

Thank you for any feedback. I will probably think of more questions but these are the big four.

This was what I posted after talking to my VSO......

I finally got my VSO to return my call (they are 3 hours away making a day drive impossible with work). He suggested I fill out a DD form 149 and have the board review the MEB discharge and change my discharge from 10% to 30%.

As far as the secondary issue goes, he said the AMC will review the mitral valve and make a decision as secondary issue to the SVT. If they deny it, the BVA judge can then make a final ruling. I was told that it should most likely be approved because the judge implied that she felt it was raised by the record in her remand. That was promising news as I was getting frustrated.

I have not received anything from the AMC as of yet. I hope this doesn't take another 2 years for a blatant error the RO refuses to acknowledge.

Any additional comments will be appreciated.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Recommended Posts

  • 0

AMC is not good. We have members here who are deep inside the AMC and getting out is like being under the dome.

J

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Ad

  • 0

The answer to many of these things is a matter of reading it carefully. Notice :

The issue of entitlement to service connection for degenerative mitral valve disease, to include as secondary to service-connected supraventricular tachycardia, has been raised by the record, but has not been adjudicated by the Agency of Original Jurisdiction (AOJ).

No. You did not file for it but some gomer decided they could hamster wheel you at the AMC. They needed breathing room and they got it. The BVA does everything at once so this means your whole claim is put on ice for the AMC to make a decision in the first instance as to whether the degenerative mitral valve disease has anything to do w/ the supra tach. $100 bucks says they come back with a denial on that and then you lose the increase to 30% There may or may not be some hanky panky with whose wire was whose, but it's fairly clear that the BVA is disinterested in it and concentrating more on the correct percentage for the supra tach rather than what it should have been in 2003. If you had a disagreement with what transpired in 2003 and did not appeal it, that is a done deal. You appear to have filed for it, and were given 10% but failed to appeal. You can only attack it via CUE.

You currently have a claim for increase. The BVA VLJ has decided there is the possibility that you have degen mitral valve disease. They will adjudicate that in the first instance at the AMC because you signed a waiver giving them permission to do so. When they finish it, you will have two decisions decided by the BVA but not soon. If you are denied anew, your next trip is to the CAVC-- hopefully without that VSO chipmunk in your pocket.

​Pursuing it via the MEB will be rapid compared to the VA process but they will still have to incorporate it into a decision. We know where that has to go. Back to the RO for another decision based on original (revised) evidence. You should have this sorted out by 2017 now that the backlog is almost nonexistant.

clear prop.

Edited by asknod

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
  • 0

devide and conquer is thier game.

Edited by 63SIERRA

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
  • 0

That's plagiarism. You must have read my book.

cp

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
  • 0

I feel that a strong independent medical opinion would possibly square this away.

The criteria for IMOs ( Or the IMO doctor might well want to do an IME) is in our IMO forum.

However dont excpect too ,much from the Black Hole (AMC) .

I had 3 IMOs for my AO DMII claim filed in 2003.

The Buffalo RO ignored them, the AMC ignored them and then the Seattle RO ignored them and then when the BVA got the IMOS, after a brief remand they awarded. All that took 6 years. I would handle that situation much differently these days.

With the IMO ...which could clear up your issues,in my opinion, if the IMO doc has ALL available med recs ,all VA C & P and all AL:L VA decision,

and your SMRs. and the doc could cover the mitral valve issue as well, it could possibly get a decent response from the AMC.

If you do get an IMO send it to the BVA as well as the AMC and the AOJ you had originally.

If the AMC ignores the IMO, then I can tell you what to do next.

However the BVA wont ignore it ,if it supports your claim ,and if it follows the IMO criteria here at hadit in our IMO forum.

Edited by Berta

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

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 account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now

  • Ads

  • Ad

  • Latest News
  • Our picks

    • OK so I had pancreatectomy in 2003 due to an impacted goldstone 2/3 of my  Pancreas was removed I am type one diabetes with very large scars continued diarrhea stomach problems Constant back and shoulder pain I recently received a Nexus letter from my  endocrinologist related to my service in the gulf war.  Any suggestions or advice from anyone
    • I would like to meet other Hadit members who live in Michigan.  We have at least two major VA Hospitals (Battle Creek, Ann Arbor).  Or maybe you go to the the John Dingell in Detroit.  

      I like Ann Arbor.  I like the fact that most of the doctors there are also at the UM Hospital.  I don't like how uickly they seem to turn over though.  
        • Like
      • 5 replies
    • Really?
      I am confused.  A few days ago I spoke to a person at a VARO who said if I die from something other than service-connected my husband gets zero, zilch, squat.  Hmmmmmm, it seems the rules change willy-nilly...I have been rated 100% P & T for over 10 years, MS is static, and I am 56 years of age.

      Can a fellow Veteran shed a light on this?

      Thank you.
        • Haha
      • 15 replies
    • Fund raising for HadIt.com
      The site is supported through ads and ad free subscriptions, we are also asking for any support you would like to send our way. You can give a $1 or more it all helps. Keep in mind though that it is NOT tax deductible and we are NOT a non profit. As the site grows so do the costs and ads and subscription do not always keep pace with the costs. Any help is appreciated, but not required.
      • 11 replies
    • Carol Ozanecki- Blue Water vet Advocate called me with this news:

      https://www.stripes.com/news/lawmakers-launch-new-effort-to-provide-agent-orange-coverage-for-blue-water-navy-vets-1.525395

      Also there is a article in Pop Culture she sent to me----mentionig Blue Water vets buy I felt it was too political to post here. You can google it if you want to read it.

       

       
      • 10 replies
×

Important Information

{terms] and Guidelines