Received Decision from BVA

[nanaeris]

I just received a remand decision from BVA. It basically stated the Waco Regional office sent me to a C&P examination to determine if my bialateral service connection knee disability was causing my bialateral foot pain. The people in Waco only stated for the Doctor to evaluate whether osgood schlatter disease was causing my foot problem. In the 2008 C&P exam the doctor said no. I filed a NOD and they send me for a second exam in 2012 with the same critera. My bilateral knees are service connected for osgood schlatter disease, status post debridement degenerative joint disease and a history of chondromalacia. Even though I told them this in the NOD they still told the doctor to evaluate osgood schlatters only in the 2012 C&P exam. I had asked for a increase rating for my bilateral knee disability in 2008 which was denied. I filed a NOD and in 2012 was granted an increase from 20% to 30% per knee. The Board stated that a higher evaluation are possible under the rating criteria 38 C.F.R. & 4.71a, DCs 5010-5261. The Board also stated the grant of the 30% rating does not cover the full period that was on appeal.

I like to know am I reading this correctly that the VA should have rated my knees at a higher percentage? Also the VA did not pay me for the full period that was on appeal.

Is the Board finding binding on the Regional Office? I went to the National Insitute of Health web site and found a study called the the prevalence of foot pain and foot pain laterality in people with knee osteoarthritis, and its impact on health and function. Do you think this will help my claim of foot pain as secondary to service connect bilateral knee disability?  Any input will be highly appreciated.

Thank You,

nanaeris

[RUREADY]

I just received a remand decision from BVA. It basically stated the Waco Regional office sent me to a C&P examination to determine if my bialateral service connection knee disability was causing my bialateral foot pain. The people in Waco only stated for the Doctor to evaluate whether osgood schlatter disease was causing my foot problem. In the 2008 C&P exam the doctor said no. I filed a NOD and they send me for a second exam in 2012 with the same critera. My bilateral knees are service connected for osgood schlatter disease, status post debridement degenerative joint disease and a history of chondromalacia. Even though I told them this in the NOD they still told the doctor to evaluate osgood schlatters only in the 2012 C&P exam. I had asked for a increase rating for my bilateral knee disability in 2008 which was denied. I filed a NOD and in 2012 was granted an increase from 20% to 30% per knee. The Board stated that a higher evaluation are possible under the rating criteria 38 C.F.R. & 4.71a, DCs 5010-5261. The Board also stated the grant of the 30% rating does not cover the full period that was on appeal.

I like to know am I reading this correctly that the VA should have rated my knees at a higher percentage? Also the VA did not pay me for the full period that was on appeal.

Is the Board finding binding on the Regional Office? I went to the National Insitute of Health web site and found a study called the the prevalence of foot pain and foot pain laterality in people with knee osteoarthritis, and its impact on health and function. Do you think this will help my claim of foot pain as secondary to service connect bilateral knee disability?  Any input will be highly appreciated.

Thank You,

nanaeris

it will help if you are still getting treatment for your conditions. Also find a doctor to support

your claim. Getting treatment for any condition is a plus. Getting it connected is the problem

but it can be done. Get the right doctor he can connect it together for you keep getting treatments. RU

[Vync]

If your C&P examination was not adequate and thorough, check these rulings:

Barr v. Nicholson, 21 Vet. App. 303, 311 (2007) (holding that once VA undertakes the effort to provide an examination, even if not statutorily obligated to do so, it must provide an adequate one or, at a minimum, notify the claimant why one will not or cannot be provided). 

Stefl v. Nicholson, 21 Vet. App. 120, 124 (2007) (indicating an opinion is considered adequate when it is based on consideration of an appellant's medical history and examinations and describes the disability in sufficient detail so the Board's evaluation of the claimed disability is a fully informed one)

If you don't already have them, I recommend you get a copy of your C&P exams and/or DBQ's. Compare the findings with the rating criteria. If it looks like they performed an inadequate exam, it your could still NOD it.

 

[RUREADY]

If your C&P examination was not adequate and thorough, check these rulings:

If you don't already have them, I recommend you get a copy of your C&P exams and/or DBQ's. Compare the findings with the rating criteria. If it looks like they performed an inadequate exam, it your could still NOD it.

 

find a RO that does this is where the problem is at. It is written for WHO to follow????

[Vync]

find a RO that does this is where the problem is at. It is written for WHO to follow????

I think we have all been victims of shoddy C&P examinations. It stinks when a veteran has to tell the VA to follow their own rules.

[RUREADY]

it stink when you have a veteran who has no ideal to what the laws is and for him

or her to follow a decision you posted they don't understand how to read it. I try to post

in a way they understand. Keep it simple for the ones who don't know. RU

[Vync]

it stink when you have a veteran who has no ideal to what the laws is and for him

or her to follow a decision you posted they don't understand how to read it. I try to post

in a way they understand. Keep it simple for the ones who don't know. RU

Good point, I'll clean it up!