"Absence of Evidence" is not "evidence of absence".

[broncovet]

Dont Let VA pull this one on you, but they try it all the time.  

 

https://www.veteranslawblog.org/get-your-va-award-letter/

In pertinet part:

Quote

“The VA examiner based her negative nexus opinion exclusively on a lack of evidence of treatment for sleep apnea while in service, or for 16 years after service…[r]elying on the absence of evidence in medical records to provide a negative opinion is contrary to established case law, and such opinions are therefore inadequate.”

Understand the difference between "negative evidence" and "lack of evidence".  

If your doctor administers tests for, say, diabetes, and the results are negative, then that is "negative evidence".  This would go "against your claim" for diabetes.  However, if the doctor says your military service is absent a diagnosis of diabetes, then its possible, or even likely you could have still had diabetes because:

1.  Maybe you were never tested for diabetes in service but you actually had it.  

2.  Maybe you were tested, but the doctor failed to enter this into your medical record.

3.  Maybe your doctor entered it into your records, but for whatever reason, the rating specialist either could not find it, or, he top sheeted you and never bothered to read it.  

Bottom line:  Dont let VA deny you and put in the reasons and bases "your SMR's were negative for diabetes", because its a logic error to try to prove a universal negative.  

 

[porgee]

Just to add this I don't think my time of 3 years in service can add up

to all my problems I have ,maybe some of them but not all of them. I only claim

what I can prove but that just me everybody has their own way I guess

[broncovet]

While I agree you should only claim what you can prove, sometimes you may be shooting yourself in the foot that way.  

One example of this is the presumptive conditions.  Ok, you may not even know that some bad chemicals in service caused your maladies, unless you are very well read or working in the medical field, for example.  

Its VA's job to know the presumptives, you may not know them.  You may not even know what a presumptive is.  I did not know.  

Im not talking about bogus claims, Im talking about serious illnesses such as diabetes, hep c, etc.  Some Vets dont know that those "guns" they used to vaccinate you with could have infected you with a life long illness such as hep c.  

[MikeHunt]

10 hours ago, porgee said:

HOW CAN YOU WIN WITH NO EVIDENCE OF ANYTHING ON RECORDS ON A DISABILITY.

Well, the link in the OP is one way. Most of us didn't report things in service, for various reasons. You read through sick-call rangers STRs and just realize how dumb that was.

In any case, you want to get an IMO and bring in the appropriate DBQ with your evidence.

Some things are the VA's problem (Like contention book filers), some are your problem (like getting evidence).

I will say, on any gov't payouts, there's always going to be tax-evader thinktanks who'll find one or two egregious fraud cases and try to make it look like everybody is a fraudster- They want you to thrust and take the bayonet for their wars, but don't feel you deserve any pay ... Please don't repeat their propaganda.

The reason the VA started hiring college women as raters to replace Veterans is because Vets are A-holes in some respects. Instead of being for the Veteran, they'd just deny based on their feelings. I can tell you this still occurs, two of my buddies were mocking a personal trauma increase claim- Like old men are supposed to know anything about how a woman feels after she's been 'assaulted.'

The whole fricken row (of men) joined in ... All great guys, but definitely not who you'd want as raters.

The VA is certainly far more liberal in granting than it used to be, and laws/media exposure isn't the only reason.

[Buck52]

To be honest with everyone  I never knew anything about VA compensation after military, If I reported something medically while in the military I did it because I was sick or got hurt or injured ,at that time I never thought we could get compensated for that  no one ever told me and I'm sure this goes for the millions of other countless veterans out there.

Had I known  I would have my 20 year rule plus in by now. my EED dates back to 1999  the year I applied for increase from being 50%  Award TDIU P&T 2002 but they paid me back to 1999...but everyone says the 20 year rule is from your Award date..so I have almost 5 more years left.

But Had I known I could file I would have filed 15 years before that back in 1985 is when I started having medical problems all cause and occurred from Vietnam.

 

Its only when a Veteran files for a disability claim does he learn the claims process...I just hope the younger Gulf War Veterans don't have to go through what all us older veterans had to.

 

Also check that C-File It may have some Information pertaining to your medical service you don't remember and could save you years on your claims.

[MikeR]

I recall being told by someone to make sure things got documented. I still had to fight like hell.

[porgee]

6 hours ago, MikeHunt said:

Well, the link in the OP is one way. Most of us didn't report things in service, for various reasons. You read through sick-call rangers STRs and just realize how dumb that was.

In any case, you want to get an IMO and bring in the appropriate DBQ with your evidence.

Some things are the VA's problem (Like contention book filers), some are your problem (like getting evidence).

I will say, on any gov't payouts, there's always going to be tax-evader thinktanks who'll find one or two egregious fraud cases and try to make it look like everybody is a fraudster- They want you to thrust and take the bayonet for their wars, but don't feel you deserve any pay ... Please don't repeat their propaganda.

The reason the VA started hiring college women as raters to replace Veterans is because Vets are A-holes in some respects. Instead of being for the Veteran, they'd just deny based on their feelings. I can tell you this still occurs, two of my buddies were mocking a personal trauma increase claim- Like old men are supposed to know anything about how a woman feels after she's been 'assaulted.'

The whole fricken row (of men) joined in ... All great guys, but definitely not who you'd want as raters.

The VAWell, t\ is certainly far more liberal in granting than it used to be, and laws/media exposure isn't the only reason.

Well, the link in the OP is one way, to do what you have evidence in the file and we cant win a claim , but now we can win

with no evidence just get the IMO JUST DONT SOUND RIGHT TO ME. Evidence always can win it just might

take  some time to get them to look at the evidence to me 10 years for them to read ny evidence but they paid off

finally.