Jump to content

Ask Your VA Claims Questions | Read Current Posts 
Read VA Disability Claims Articles
Search | View All Forums | Donate | Blogs | New Users | Rules 

  • tbirds-va-claims-struggle (1).png

  • 01-2024-stay-online-donate-banner.png

     

I think this will help with smc

Rate this topic


Recommended Posts

  • Content Curator/HadIt.com Elder

Please be aware that document was authored in 2010, so some of it may have changed in the past eight years. I do agree that it is a much easier read than the VA regulations governing how they approach SMC, for which I have linked the most recent version below.

M21-1, Part IV, Subpart ii, Chapter 2, Section H - Special Monthly Compensation (SMC)

"If it's stupid but works, then it isn't stupid."
- From Murphy's Laws of Combat

Disclaimer: I am not a legal expert, so use at own risk and/or consult a qualified professional representative. Please refer to existing VA laws, regulations, and policies for the most up to date information.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Possibly- I dont have time to read it but I used a page from the VBM by NVLSP describing the SMC mandate for my SMC CUE.

I am sure I posted their explanation here in the topic re: my SMC CUE.

The decision was from a 1998 award letter. You could use my exact citation.

Husband had 100% SC PTSD and 100% from a 1151 stroke. It was all on the rating sheet and they never mentioned SMC at all in the decision.

My CUE was based on their lack of consideration of the SMC mandate and also I sent in an excerpt from M21-1MR.

That CUE stayed at Buffalo RO from 2004 to 2012, so I asked the Nehmer RO ( I had a AO IHD claim) to adjudiate the CUE-they did and awarded it-2012- and also a 2003 IHD  CUE I had, the Buffalo RO never made a decision on was awarded as well.

 

GRADUATE ! Nov 2nd 2007 American Military University !

When thousands of Americans faced annihilation in the 1800s Chief

Osceola's response to his people, the Seminoles, was

simply "They(the US Army)have guns, but so do we."

Sameo to us -They (VA) have 38 CFR ,38 USC, and M21-1- but so do we.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

BTW , my former vet rep told me not to even file a NOD on the award ( it contained 4-5 CUEs)because" 1151s are different than regular  claims. What a dope -I did believe him for a while , and the award had been a battle, but then by 2003-2004 I knew he was wrong.

Edited by Berta

GRADUATE ! Nov 2nd 2007 American Military University !

When thousands of Americans faced annihilation in the 1800s Chief

Osceola's response to his people, the Seminoles, was

simply "They(the US Army)have guns, but so do we."

Sameo to us -They (VA) have 38 CFR ,38 USC, and M21-1- but so do we.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

This is  my SMC CUE claim:

To whom it may concern:

This is a claim under CUE, 38 USC, 5109A.

I believe that VA erred in the lack of application of 38 USC 1114 regarding the above veteran’s entitlement to SMC. Although M21-1,Part 6 provides that SMC will be considered and rated as it is an inferred issue for any claim with SMC potential, VA failed to consider a retroactive award of SMC in adjudicating the veteran’s Section 1151 , which I re-opened after his death.”

( I referred to and enclosed copy of the SMC statutory mandate,I also enclosed the 1998 DIC decision I received, that the CUE was in and also I enclosed the veteran's posthumous 100% SC P & T PTSD award.

100% SC plus 60%SC of in independent system equals SMC.

I also stated the CVA ratings were wrong...they rated the CVA at 80% in 1998 and then awarded 100% under 1151 for the CVA last year as well as the SMC Housebound award..

I also stated The medical evidence had been established , and in VA's possession at time of the 1998 decision and the VA errors in the 1998 decision manifested an outcome that was detrimental to me.


 

I used copy of M21-1MR Part VI, March 25,2003 Change 102, Erratum under 3.09 ISSUE and 3.10” Inferred issues and Ancillary benefits” to support the SMC mandate in 38 USC 1114.

Also I used this page:


 

"The VA Adjudication Procedures Manual (M21-1MR) mandates that VA adjudicators consider entitlement to 

    special monthly compensation as an inferred issue. VA rating activities are obligated to consider entitlement to 

    special monthly compensation in all decisions where the medical evidence indicates possible entitlement."

    Source:  2009 Edition of the Veterans Benefits Manual by National Veterans Legal Services Program.Page 333.

Also the 2010 Edition of VBM by NVLSP has this statement:

 

"In Chapter 17, Note 261 of the 2010 Edition of the VBM, NVLSP makes this statement referencing the CAVC Bradley decision:

"the effective date of payment for Special Monthly Compensation is not when the issue was specifically raised by the evidence, but when the evidence first suggested a need for this benefit."

And enclosed a copy of the 1998 erroneous decision.

Hope it helps.

 

GRADUATE ! Nov 2nd 2007 American Military University !

When thousands of Americans faced annihilation in the 1800s Chief

Osceola's response to his people, the Seminoles, was

simply "They(the US Army)have guns, but so do we."

Sameo to us -They (VA) have 38 CFR ,38 USC, and M21-1- but so do we.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

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 account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now


  • Tell a friend

    Love HadIt.com’s VA Disability Community Vets helping Vets since 1997? Tell a friend!
  • Recent Achievements

  • Our picks

    • Caluza Triangle defines what is necessary for service connection
      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”
      • 0 replies
    • Do the sct codes help or hurt my disability rating 
    • 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.   
    • Welcome to hadit!  

          There are certain rules about community care reimbursement, and I have no idea if you met them or not.  Try reading this:

      https://www.va.gov/resources/getting-emergency-care-at-non-va-facilities/

         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:

      https://www.law.cornell.edu/cfr/text/38/3.344

       
    • Good question.   

          Maybe I can clear it up.  

          The spouse is eligible for DIC if you die of a SC condition OR any condition if you are P and T for 10 years or more.  (my paraphrase).  

      More here:

      Source:

      https://www.va.gov/disability/dependency-indemnity-compensation/

      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. 
×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

Guidelines and Terms of Use