A good Post from broncovet

[Buck52]

I thought I's re-post this  for you veterans seeking an increase.

its Great Information  please read his post

 

 

[Andyman73]

Buck,

Thanks for sharing that!!!!!  I printed it out right away.  Hmmm...some good stuff there, might even be able to use it the correct some errors of VA misjudgement!

Semper Fi.

Andy

[broncovet]

Yes, and there is a similar NVLSP training on EFFECTIVE DATE errors, too, that may just be what a Veteran needs if they are seeking an EED.   

http://www.purpleheart.org/ServiceProgram/Training2011/W-2%20Common%20VA%20Effective%20Date%20ErrorsL.pdf

While both of these NVLSP training guides are extremely accurate and valuable, they are from 2011, and do not reflect "case law" or regulatory changes since then.   You can use these as a guide, but seach for "new" case law on your issue, too, before you use this for your appeals.  

Edited February 4, 2016 by broncovet

[Vync]

Here is some slightly newer NVLSP training from 2013 regarding Effective Dates but focusing more on Inferred/Informal Claims.

http://www.purpleheart.org/ServiceProgram/Training2013/19-T-Effective%20dates-Ron.pdf

[Corpsman8404]

Thanks Buck!

 

I have a question for anyone on this statement from your past thread link of:

Nvlsp Common Va Errors For Increase

http://www.purpleheart.org/ServiceProgram/Training2011/T-4%20%20VA%20Errors%20in%20Claims%20for%20Increase%203.2011.pdf

 

 

Diagnostic code for most psychiatric disorders follow a pattern:

– For certain rating, vet must suffer from occupational and social impairment at level A, due to such symptoms as B, C, D and E

VA denies higher rating on absence of B, C, D, and E.

BUT symptoms listed in the diagnostic code are simply meant as guidance, not as an exhaustive list – consider all of the evidence of record – “It is not the symptoms, but their effects, that determine the level of impairment.”

Argue 38 C.F.R. § 4.7 if your client’s level of disability more closely resembles a higher evaluation, even if she or he does not suffer from all of the enumerated symptoms

 

 

 

So, I guess my question is this. Since I feel I have some of the 100% attributes (PTSD), would it be "inappropriate" to reference that bold part above in my documentation for the raters/examiners in a document,or even my "request for IU" written statement when applying for it? Wondering if the raters would be like...."oh, a smarta$$ here"?

 

* I am not doing a NOD, but asking for a increase on PTSD and also applying for IU.

 

 

Edited February 4, 2016 by Corpsman8404

[broncovet]

Good question, Corpsman.  I suggest Veteran's apply for every benefit to which they feel entitled, and to present their evidence in as persuasive way as possible.  

If you read CAVC case law, they sometimes say things like they find (either the claimant or the Secretary's) arguement (non)  persuasive.   In other words, they are required to consider our "entitlement theories".  

If you think 38 CFR 4.7 supports your position, by all means utilize it.  

Personally, I think you should advance favorable arguements, when ever you can.  

Lets say you had 10 reasons why you think you should get IU. 

1.  You had a doctor opine you were unable to maintain SGE.

2.  You got fired from your job becasue you went to too many doc appointments and missed too much work.

3.  You tried to get rehired, but no one would hire you.  

4. Its supported by regulations.

5.  Its supporeted by case law.  

etc, etc.  YOu should cite your doctors exam, show you applied for many jobs, cite the regulation and cite the case law.  Its much better to cite evidence that to make conclusory vague statements such as 

"I deserve this benefit".  Instead, say, "Dr. Jones, in an exam dated 1-31-12 opined that I was unable to maintain SGE due to SC conditions".