Prepare For Bva Hearing

[paulcolrain]

2004 i was released from service. same year i claimed low back and bilateral hip strain. i had a c+p exam and doc said (diagnosed ) i had bilateral hip strain and lumbar strain. 2005 i was denied both the reason given was , no service treatment records could be found at all for my time in service if service treatment records are later found my claims will be re-open. i dint appeal this at the time i just waited for them to find the records.

december 2009 the VA found my records and granted me 10% for lumbar strain but, did nothing about my hips. 6 months later i sent a NOD stating that this is a claim that proceeded a denial because of service treatment records and because the records were later found then all my claims should have been re-open. they agreed but said we still are denying you for hips because your service treatment records didnt change our opinion about your hips. nothing in your record states anything about hips.. i got a copy of my c-file and yes there it was,,, service treatment records for my hips in fact in service doctors also stated that i had bilateral hip strain BUT said it existed prior to service.

i submitted this paper and they gave me a c+p exam. the doc stated nothing is wrong with my hips and that i had an existing history for a left hip diagnoses. during this time i was being seen at the VAMC and receiving treatment for my hips and lower back and radiculopathy. in fact , just 1 week after this c+p exam a vamc report shows my evaluation for my hips and range of motion to be with pain and a diagnoses of bilaterl hip strain. again i get denied because no doctor said it was do to service. then in 2011 i sent a primary care letter stating that i my bilateral hip pain could very well be related to service because of multiple rigors of life during service such as running and PT. Again this wasnt good enough, they stated i needed new evidence to re-open my claim and the doctor letter wasnt good enough because he didnt do a eval even though he was my primary also his letter didnt cite anything from my service records. i then got another letter from him after he read a few reports during service and he sent a new letter stating that he wishes to ammend the letter he already sent,,, it is now clear that the rigors of active duty are more likely than not created the issues with my current hip problems and stated the ortho reports from my service treatment records. so, i have a lot of records that rebut all the ro problems but they still deny and now i have a BVA hearing in D.C. on the 2nd week of may...

can anyone ask me some questions so that i can prepare for this hearing ,,,, questions that they would ask or some problems that you see i might face...

1) Injury in service, 2)injury now. 3) Nexus or IMO.

My 1 is (pain in hips and lower back during and after Physical Fitness Training

My 2 is (treatment records and diagnosis of bilateral hip pain on movement diagnosis hip strain.

My 3 is (service treatment records sating pain on movement diagnoses of hip strain. Also Dr. letter saying that the rigors of Physical Fitness during service such as running marching (multiple non-specific traumas to hips and back) more likely than not due to his service because of treatment records start with service and state pain with PT hips and back profile needed…

Edited March 20, 2015 by paulcolrain

[paulcolrain]

Free_Spirit // you mentioned low back strain and hip strain in service at the same time?If so, it seems very odd that they gave you SC for the back strain, but denied SC for bilateral hip strain that occurred at the same time on the basis that ONE/////// yes this always confused me as well. the reasoning for the lumbar strain SC they said because i showed a diagnosis in service and residuals after service with-in a year. well,, my question was always ummm my hips show same thing ??? also yes, the Dr note from childhood doesnt say that in 1999 i was suffering at that time from hip only that he performed a procedure on my knee... so great point that his note could also provide evidence that i had not sought any treatment for my hip since childhood and that must show that the hip was fine. UNTIL SERVICE AFTER SERVICE.

ASK_NOD///// THANK you for giving me a clearer picture on the Wilson vs. Derwinski........ how it applies to 3.303 (a) FANTASTIC !!!!!!!!!!!

Im not aware of what my symptoms where when i was an infant/youngster i do not recall any pain on movement in either hip But im quite aware of what they where in the service and since and why i sought out treatment in service and after.

Edited March 28, 2015 by paulcolrain

[paulcolrain]

carlie --- my SC is 40% lumbar strain DJD..... then 10% left and right radiculopathy.

[free_spirit_etc]

Free_Spirit // you mentioned low back strain and hip strain in service at the same time?If so, it seems very odd that they gave you SC for the back strain, but denied SC for bilateral hip strain that occurred at the same time on the basis that ONE/////// yes this always confused me as well. the reasoning for the lumbar strain SC they said because i showed a diagnosis in service and residuals after service with-in a year. well,, my question was always ummm my hips show same thing ??? also yes, the Dr note from childhood doesnt say that in 1999 i was suffering at that time from hip only that he performed a procedure on my knee... so great point that his note could also provide evidence that i had not sought any treatment for my hip since childhood and that must show that the hip was fine. UNTIL SERVICE AFTER SERVICE.

Even the first C&P says apparently you were treated adequately for the condition as a child.

It is amazing that you get treatment in service for your low back and hips (bilateral) and they can concede that something occurred that was enough to injure your low back, but deny the same thing also effected both hips, though you got treatment for those too. Perhaps the hip condition isn't an aggravation of Leggs-Perthes. Perhaps it is a hip injury that had nothing to do with the Leggs-Perthes. Maybe they are just using Leggs-Perthes and an out. But even then, to say that a pre-existing condition in one hip just happened to "naturally progress" (very rapidly) and effect BOTH hips at precisely the same time you injured your back -- seems like a real stretch of logic.

[paulcolrain]

yes,,lol,,,, thats why i keep reminding them that my claim is for bilateral hip strain NOT BILATERAL LEG PERTHES.... they keep denying me for leg perthes and i have never claimed for it. in all the SOCs they never mention that my diagnosed hip strain is actualy perthes or that it is not actualy perthes . all they keep pointing to is that i had a history of it. its like they use it and run with it and pretend im not claiming hip strain

[paulcolrain]

wow.... i also just found something so interesting in my c-file.........

a physical profile after a clinic check and this profile is a 3 under lower extremeties..

9 days later i returned to the clinic and the Dr. increased my profile from 3 to 4 under the lower extremety also added no standing past 10 minutes.

if this isnt an absolute proof of an increase i dont know what is..... also,,, how can they prove no aggravation with out a doubt....

[broncovet]

You may have a similar problem as to the one I have, frequently: I overcomplicate stuff. You might try getting back to 2 basics:

1. Your purpose at the hearing is to make sure they have ALL your evidence. Compare your cfile with what your records show, and, if they have stuff missing, then point it out, and offer a copy of yours. This is the way VA loves to deny: Incomplete, inaccurate evidence. It works for them every time.

2. Next, remember and focus on the 3 things needed for service connection: a) Current diagnosis b) In service event or aggravation and c) nexus.

If your nexus is incomplete/inaccurate/ambigious, then you may just consider asking in your review about your nexus:

Simply ask: "Does this doc statement meet your criteria as a valid nexus?" If the answer is no, then you can ask for a C and P exam to clarify your nexus statement..this could involve a remand. I dont recommend "arguing" your doc's statement IS a valid nexus, but instead asking them at the hearing if they think it is, indeed, a valid nexus.

If they say it is, its gonna be tough for them to say it isnt later. If they say its not, then you should ask for a new c and p to clarify, or get ready for a denial and your IMO/IME.