Got an unofficial notification from the DAV about my DRO appeal stating that they were giving me an earlier date for my tinnitus (that baffled me) and that they were granting me 40% for my back (degenerative arthritis). My appeal was for secondary service connection for my knees, there was nothing about my knees in the "unofficial notification".
So I went to the closest regional off and was finally seen. They looked up the "official" notification (SOC) from the VA and it stated nothing about my back but stated that they had denied me my secondary claim on my knees stating that the Dr couldn't find anything to connect my claim to either my back or the service (um, always thought knees went when back went, so secondary was almost a given, then again he did specialize in cardiology).
In someways I am not that surprised, but I am wondering about the "unofficial" notice both the "unofficial" and "official" where dated the same (July 5th) I cannot believe in a matter of a few moments the VA totally changed their decision. So that has got me flummoxed.
What makes this unique is that if the 40% for my back was based on the one medical entry that they didn't use for my initial claim back in 95/96. I was never able to get anybody to write me a nexus letter for this so I could "officially" reopen the case. If the "unofficial" letter holds true and I am just waiting on other paperwork to be finalized then they have all but argued CUE and handed me a win without even trying (I know the VA will never give up that easily). The entry stated scoliosis and that it was a recurring issue, their determination was based on an earlier entry and stated in black and white they could not find any other entries. Can you say "gotchya"?
Getting a letter now for my knees should be easier since I have some indication that the VA does ("did") give some indication that they felt that my evidence did indicate connection to the service concerning my back.
Can anyone possibly clue me into what might be going on? Did the DAV totally get it wrong? Or, is this just part of the whole overall process and I am only seeing part of it?
Caluza Triangle – Caluza vs Brown defined what is necessary for service connection. See COVA– CALUZA V. BROWN–TOTAL RECALL
This has to be MEDICALLY Documented in your records:
Current Diagnosis. (No diagnosis, no Service Connection.)
In-Service Event or Aggravation.
Nexus (link- cause and effect- connection) or Doctor’s Statement close to: “The Veteran’s (current diagnosis) is at least as likely due to x Event in military service”
VA has gotten away with (mis) interpreting their ambigious, , vague regulations, then enforcing them willy nilly never in Veterans favor.
They justify all this to congress by calling themselves a "pro claimant Veteran friendly organization" who grants the benefit of the doubt to Veterans.
This is not true,
Proof:
About 80-90 percent of Veterans are initially denied by VA, pushing us into a massive backlog of appeals, or worse, sending impoverished Veterans "to the homeless streets" because when they cant work, they can not keep their home. I was one of those Veterans who they denied for a bogus reason: "Its been too long since military service". This is bogus because its not one of the criteria for service connection, but simply made up by VA. And, I was a homeless Vet, albeit a short time, mostly due to the kindness of strangers and friends.
Hadit would not be necessary if, indeed, VA gave Veterans the benefit of the doubt, and processed our claims efficiently and paid us promptly. The VA is broken.
A huge percentage (nearly 100 percent) of Veterans who do get 100 percent, do so only after lengthy appeals. I have answered questions for thousands of Veterans, and can only name ONE person who got their benefits correct on the first Regional Office decision. All of the rest of us pretty much had lengthy frustrating appeals, mostly having to appeal multiple multiple times like I did.
I wish I know how VA gets away with lying to congress about how "VA is a claimant friendly system, where the Veteran is given the benefit of the doubt". Then how come so many Veterans are homeless, and how come 22 Veterans take their life each day? Va likes to blame the Veterans, not their system.
However, (and I have no idea of knowing whether or not you would likely succeed) Im unsure of why you seem to be so adamant against getting an increase in disability compensation.
When I buy stuff, say at Kroger, or pay bills, I have never had anyone say, "Wait! Is this money from disability compensation, or did you earn it working at a regular job?" Not once. Thus, if you did get an increase, likely you would have no trouble paying this with the increase compensation.
However, there are many false rumors out there that suggest if you apply for an increase, the VA will reduce your benefits instead.
That rumor is false but I do hear people tell Veterans that a lot. There are strict rules VA has to reduce you and, NOT ONE of those rules have anything to do with applying for an increase.
Yes, the VA can reduce your benefits, but generally only when your condition has "actually improved" under ordinary conditions of life.
Unless you contacted the VA within 72 hours of your medical treatment, you may not be eligible for reimbursement, or at least that is how I read the link, I posted above. Here are SOME of the rules the VA must comply with in order to reduce your compensation benefits:
NOTE: TO PROVE CAUSE OF DEATH WILL LIKELY REQUIRE AN AUTOPSY. This means if you die of a SC condtion, your spouse would need to do an autopsy to prove cause of death to be from a SC condtiond. If you were P and T for 10 full years, then the cause of death may not matter so much.
Question
OldJoe
Got an unofficial notification from the DAV about my DRO appeal stating that they were giving me an earlier date for my tinnitus (that baffled me) and that they were granting me 40% for my back (degenerative arthritis). My appeal was for secondary service connection for my knees, there was nothing about my knees in the "unofficial notification".
So I went to the closest regional off and was finally seen. They looked up the "official" notification (SOC) from the VA and it stated nothing about my back but stated that they had denied me my secondary claim on my knees stating that the Dr couldn't find anything to connect my claim to either my back or the service (um, always thought knees went when back went, so secondary was almost a given, then again he did specialize in cardiology).
In someways I am not that surprised, but I am wondering about the "unofficial" notice both the "unofficial" and "official" where dated the same (July 5th) I cannot believe in a matter of a few moments the VA totally changed their decision. So that has got me flummoxed.
What makes this unique is that if the 40% for my back was based on the one medical entry that they didn't use for my initial claim back in 95/96. I was never able to get anybody to write me a nexus letter for this so I could "officially" reopen the case. If the "unofficial" letter holds true and I am just waiting on other paperwork to be finalized then they have all but argued CUE and handed me a win without even trying (I know the VA will never give up that easily). The entry stated scoliosis and that it was a recurring issue, their determination was based on an earlier entry and stated in black and white they could not find any other entries. Can you say "gotchya"?
Getting a letter now for my knees should be easier since I have some indication that the VA does ("did") give some indication that they felt that my evidence did indicate connection to the service concerning my back.
Can anyone possibly clue me into what might be going on? Did the DAV totally get it wrong? Or, is this just part of the whole overall process and I am only seeing part of it?
40% Back
10% Tenitis
10% Left Knee
10% Anxiety
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Top Posters For This Question
63
8
6
3
Popular Days
Nov 5
17
Aug 29
12
Aug 30
10
Aug 27
9
Top Posters For This Question
OldJoe 63 posts
Berta 8 posts
spearhead91 6 posts
Buck52 3 posts
Popular Days
Nov 5 2018
17 posts
Aug 29 2018
12 posts
Aug 30 2018
10 posts
Aug 27 2018
9 posts
Popular Posts
brokensoldier244th
I have gotten double unofficial notification from the DAV before, with a phone call. I can't speak to the DAV as a whole, but the local office here has always been right, in 17 years. They sent me a l
Berta
You might have a 38 CFR 3.156 situation- meaning the VA might have considered your claim in 95/96 as "not well grounded" and failed to even get your STRs.Or they did get your STRs but never consi
OldJoe
Thank you very much spearhead91 this will be read and looked through while I write my statement. Hopefully will have it up tonight before I go to bed (never think very well when I am tired). Also, h
Posted Images
85 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