Click To Ask Your VA Claims Question
Read Disability Claims Articles
View All Forums | Chats and Other Events | Donate | Blogs | New Users | Search | Rules
- 0
Click To Ask Your VA Claims Question
Read Disability Claims Articles
View All Forums | Chats and Other Events | Donate | Blogs | New Users | Search | Rules
Question
Berta
This has cropped up here recently and I wanted to bring the subject up, although it is searchable here.
The VA fact sheet is basic:
"What Are Accrued Benefits? Accrued benefits are benefits that are due to the beneficiary based on an existing decision on a claim for benefits or evidence in the Veteran’s claim file at the date of death, but not paid prior to death."
http://www.benefits.va.gov/BENEFITS/factsheets/general/accrued.pdf
There are explained in more detail here:
https://www.hillandponton.com/va-benefits-for-qualified-survivors-accrued-benefits-and-substitution-basics/
Accrued benefits derive from a pending claim, and depend on evidence in the Claims file at time of the veteran's death.
Nehmer III ( August 2010) is the only exception:
https://www.law.cornell.edu/cfr/text/38/3.816
The full explanation of accrued under Nehmer III is found under 38 CFR 3.816 (f) (iv)
And the full explanation of the most unique part of Nehmer III (august 2010) is found here at hadit under a search regarding Footnote One, specifically
in many posts I made to include this one:
"Rick Spataro, Head Nehmer lawyer of NVLSP, explained Footnote One to me this way in email as soon as the Regulations were being prepared for the 3 new AO presumptives in 2010:
“As for your second question, if the VA should have coded IHD in a rating decision, the claim that resulted in the rating decision could be considered a claim for benefits for IHD under footnote 1 of the Final Stipulation and Order in Nehmer. It basically depends on the timing of the claim, rating decision, and evidence received while the claim was pending. It may also depend on the rules in the Manual M21-1 regarding coding that were in effect at the time of the claim.
Typically, though, the following example would be accurate: A veteran filed a claim for SC for a low back disability on May 1, 1990. The VA obtained medical evidence showing a diagnosis of IHD in the development of that claim. The VA issued a rating decision on April 1, 1991, but does not code IHD (list IHD as “NSC” on the code sheet of the rating decision). Under footnote 1, since the condition should have been coded in the April 1, 1991 decision, the May 1, 1990 claim should be considered a claim for SC for IHD under Nehmer. “
As I mentioned here before I was a Footnote One Nehmer claimant."
I have no idea yet on whether the VA will add new presumptives to the AO list. We should all know by Novermber .
I don't know if there will be a Footnote One scenario if there is a Nehmer IV. In any event , I can explain it all here when and if it happens and will access Rick Spataro ,if we need a further exdplanation , and I will attach his email response here.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Top Posters For This Question
2
2
Popular Days
Aug 10
3
Aug 11
1
Top Posters For This Question
Berta 2 posts
broncovet 2 posts
Popular Days
Aug 10 2017
3 posts
Aug 11 2017
1 post
3 answers to this question
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now