Help! I Am So )$(^&^$#*@@ Pissed!

[ranger11bv]

I just got the results from my C&P exam from 21 April. As I am looking through them now, I see very GLARING LIES. Such as:

"Does pain, weakness, fatigability, or in-coordination, significantly limit functionality with repeated use over a period of time?" NO (YES!!!!)

" does veteran use any assisted devices?" NO (YES!!!! Shoe inserts, leg/knee braces- both legs, Canadian crutches, wrist splints on BOTH arms)

And so MANY others I cant type right now im just without words. The blatant lying is just... WTF????

What can/should I do. IG, FBI, Justice Dept, ect.....

I want her HEAD!!!!!!!!!!

Im scanning the report in as I type this to my computer. If anyone wants a lookse, let me know. God know I need help now!!!

Edited May 9, 2015 by ranger11bv

[broncovet]

Welcome to the Department of Veterans Affairs. If it were honesty you were looking for, well it went out the Window after Abraham Lincoln's Assination, and has been going downhill since.

There are 3 ways to overcome a bad C and P exam:

1. Confront the examiner. Explain there were "inaccuracies" that your records may have been mixed up with another Veteran as "that is not what you said". Ask him to amend it to make the applicable corrections. Be cordial. You get more flies with honey than with vinegar.

2. Get an IMO/IME refuting what the bad c and p examiner said. You may be even be able to get a VA doc to do a more favorable medical opinion. Remember, VA is not a unified body, and when one employee says "yea" the next one will say "nay".

3. Attack the credibility of the examiner. Find out who he was, and if he has any experience (such as board certified). If the examiner lacks expertise in your area of medicine, this will likely work. Read about that more here: http://www.attiglawfirm.com/communicate/inadequate-c-and-p-exams/

YOU can also do some combination of the three, above. Chris Attig has some very good advice here, you should carefully read what he says, and follow the links he supplies, too.

Edited May 9, 2015 by broncovet

[free_spirit_etc]

In general, I think that depends on the laws of the state. In my state both parties have to consent. My adjoining state only requires one person's consent.

Ranger11bv:

Legally, I think you have to get consent to record another person's voice otherwise, it could be a violation of the other person's privacy?

[Navy04]

I have had 4 FDCs and over 30 C&Ps in the last 2 years, and only a handful of Exams or Docs went the right way. Sorry to hear of your issues bud, but as I always say if you waive the evidence in the VA's face, they have to Legally grant you eventually. Good luck

[Buck52]

I'd do number 2 of broncovets post!

Retaliation only will cause more problems.

jmo

....................Buck

[Buck52]

Source: CFR's

2 Interpretation of examination reports.

Different examiners, at different times, will not describe the same disability in the same language. Features of the disability which must have persisted unchanged may be overlooked or a change for the better or worse may not be accurately appreciated or described. It is the responsibility of the rating specialist to interpret reports of examination in the light of the whole recorded history, reconciling the various reports into a consistent picture so that the current rating may accurately reflect the elements of disability present. Each disability must be considered from the point of view of the veteran working or seeking work. If a diagnosis is not supported by the findings on the examination report or if the report does not contain sufficient detail, it is incumbent upon the rating board to return the report as inadequate for evaluation purposes.

[41 FR 11292, Mar. 18, 1976]

return arrow Back to Top

§4.3 Resolution of reasonable doubt.

It is the defined and consistently applied policy of the Department of Veterans Affairs to administer the law under a broad interpretation, consistent, however, with the facts shown in every case. When after careful consideration of all procurable and assembled data, a reasonable doubt arises regarding the degree of disability such doubt will be resolved in favor of the claimant. See §3.102 of this chapter.

[40 FR 42535, Sept. 15, 1975]

return arrow Back to Top

§4.6 Evaluation of evidence.

The element of the weight to be accorded the character of the veteran's service is but one factor entering into the considerations of the rating boards in arriving at determinations of the evaluation of disability. 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.

return arrow Back to Top

§4.7 Higher of two evaluations.

Where there is a question as to which of two evaluations shall be applied, the higher evaluation will be assigned if the disability picture more nearly approximates the criteria required for that rating. Otherwise, the lower rating will be assigned.

return arrow Back to Top

§4.9 Congenital or developmental defects.

Mere congenital or developmental defects, absent, displaced or supernumerary parts, refractive error of the eye, personality disorder and mental deficiency are not diseases or injuries in the meaning of applicable legislation for disability compensation purposes.

[41 FR 11292, Mar. 18, 1976]

return arrow Back to Top

§4.10 Functional impairment.

The basis of disability evaluations is the ability of the body as a whole, or of the psyche, or of a system or organ of the body to function under the ordinary conditions of daily life including employment. Whether the upper or lower extremities, the back or abdominal wall, the eyes or ears, or the cardiovascular, digestive, or other system, or psyche are affected, evaluations are based upon lack of usefulness, of these parts or systems, especially in self-support. This imposes upon the medical examiner the responsibility of furnishing, in addition to the etiological, anatomical, pathological, laboratory and prognostic data required for ordinary medical classification, full description of the effects of disability upon the person's ordinary activity. In this connection, it will be remembered that a person may be too disabled to engage in employment although he or she is up and about and fairly comfortable at home or upon limited activity.

...................Buck

[broncovet]

Bottom Line:

Medical Evidence has the presumption of regularity unless rebutted with other competent medical opinions. Lay persons statements can not "trump" what the doc says. You need to attack bad medical evidence with good medical evidence. If you can not get the c and p doc to change his mind, then you have 2 choices:

1. Get an IMO/IME or other Veterans favorable medical evidence.

2. "Attack" the credibility of the examiner. By this I dont mean a "personal attack" upon the doc. No. I mean you argue he is unqualified to make such a statement as does not have expertise in that field. Dont attack the doc, attack his credentials. See more from Chris Attig website on this and the wording in your NOD to do just that.