Jump to content
VA Disability Community via Hadit.com

VA Disability Claims Articles

Ask Your VA Claims Question | Current Forum Posts Search | Rules | View All Forums
VA Disability Articles | Chats and Other Events | Donate | Blogs | New Users

  • hohomepage-banner-2024-2.png

  • 27-year-anniversary-leaderboard.png

    advice-disclaimer.jpg

  • donate-be-a-hero.png

  • 0

Tdiu Quiz (Level: Expert)

Rate this question


Byte187

Question

I've had quite a few people disagree with me on this particular question, so I want to ask here and see what the consensus is.
Consider this hypothetical veteran:
The veteran suffered a lower-back injury on active duty back in the 1980s. He received hospital treatment at the time so, years later, with his SMR, service connection was an easy matter. The VA attributes the veterans current lower back disability to his documented injury in the 1980s.
The veteran also suffers bilateral radiculopathy (legs), and the VA connected that, secondary to the SC back condition. The verterans current rating is as follows:
40% - lower back
20% - right leg
10% - left leg
60% - total
Question: Is this veteran qualified to be considered for TDIU? Why? or Why not?
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Recommended Posts

  • 0

Thanks all, but let me just cut to the chase. I've had this conversation several times in the past two years, and so far, everybody has disagreed with me. Including two VSOs in the past 12 months, both of them even raised their voices at me, pee'd off that I had the nerve to disagree with them.

The specific point I make is this: according to 4.16a (as pointed out) veteran must have one single disability ratable at 60% or multiple disabilities rated a total of 70% with at least one of them being rated 40%. That's what everybody points out to me. But what I try to point out is subsection 2 or 4.16a:

For the above purpose of one 60 percent disability, or one 40 percent disability in combination, the following will be considered as one disability:

(2) Disabilities resulting from common etiology or a single accident.

I contend that this veteran's multiple disabilities share a common etiology (the back injury in the 80s) and therefore, the VA considers them to be one disability, rated at 60%, which now qualifies the veteran to be considered, according to 4.16a.

This is my contention that so many people have disagreed with me about. I can't understand why they disagree -- nobody has offered an explanation -- but I'll be happy to stand corrected if someone can show me why I'm wrong. And not just loudly cut me off mid-sentence, like the two VSOs did recently.

I completely agree with your common etiology theory - that part to me, is a no brainer.

Getting granted IU under this will still be quite difficult, if at all, without more supportive evidence

of unemployability.

jmho

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 0

I'm sorry, but we got way off track here. I wasn't asking if this veteran would be granted IU. My question was only if the veteran qualifies to be considered/evaluated for IU, specifically with regard to the veteran's current rating. So yeah, we got way off track.

Whether this veteran would be granted IU or not -- or what, if any, additional evidence this veteran would need to be granted IU, is all irrelevant to the original question. I'm sorry for the confusion, and maybe that's part of why I still have never gotten a clear answer to the question. I'll let the question stand and I hope to hear some more specific answers.

Let me try to clarify the question this way: Based on 38 CFR 4.16, is this veteran qualified or disqualified for IU evaluation? Why? Nevermind whether or not you feel IU would be granted in the case.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 0

Thanks all, but let me just cut to the chase. I've had this conversation several times in the past two years, and so far, everybody has disagreed with me. Including two VSOs in the past 12 months, both of them even raised their voices at me, pee'd off that I had the nerve to disagree with them.

The specific point I make is this: according to 4.16a (as pointed out) veteran must have one single disability ratable at 60% or multiple disabilities rated a total of 70% with at least one of them being rated 40%. That's what everybody points out to me. But what I try to point out is subsection 2 or 4.16a:

For the above purpose of one 60 percent disability, or one 40 percent disability in combination, the following will be considered as one disability:

(2) Disabilities resulting from common etiology or a single accident.

I contend that this veteran's multiple disabilities share a common etiology (the back injury in the 80s) and therefore, the VA considers them to be one disability, rated at 60%, which now qualifies the veteran to be considered, according to 4.16a.

This is my contention that so many people have disagreed with me about. I can't understand why they disagree -- nobody has offered an explanation -- but I'll be happy to stand corrected if someone can show me why I'm wrong. And not just loudly cut me off mid-sentence, like the two VSOs did recently.

I have the same rating as you and they would not grant me employability until I got my rating up to 40/30 but I

also had to file for depression to get TDIU . I believe that my back is the sole purpose for me to be

unemployable but VA don't think so. I have an appeals for this with an attorney for the same reason that

my back (only)is what made me unemployable I have a medical opion from a vocational expert saying the

same thing, but my RO refuses to send it to Washington for an extra-scheduler consideration. So we will see

soon what the reason as to why they wont grant benefits.

Edited by RUREADY
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 0

Byte,

That is considered one injury for IU purposes and thus the RO can adjudicate the IU claim without sending it off to washington la,la land. The RO should have sent a notice with the rating decision indicating that the Vet may be eligible for IU. It's all in the CFR.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 0

I think its because the Back and the legs are two different rating. you still don't have any one disability at 60%

its either 60 for the back or 60 for the legs. You have and eye claim in and already tbi sc rating will this be

one claim. Who's common etiology do they use ours or VA. jmho

Edited by RUREADY
Link to comment
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
×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

Guidelines and Terms of Use