first filed & EED?

[Buck52]

I realize this has been Answered 100 times

But I still do not understand it.

If Veteran files HIS FIRST CLAIM IN  Feb1998  claim and is denied and NOD within a year  Aug 1998 and gets a  Service Connection but at 0%    ok then in 1999 files  a  claim  as reopen for increase and is awarded 50% for the same claim he filed back in 1998  then  a year later he files for increase on the 50% in 2002/2003 and is Awarded 90% INFEERED TDIU P&T NO FUTURE EXAMS  DISABILITY CHRONIC IN NATURE

OK what would be the Veterans EED? FOR THE 20 YEAR PROTECTION RULE?

  Would VA go back to the 1998 date the claim was first filed?  or go back to the date the 50% was increase to the 90% and was Inferred the IU in 2002/2003?

 

Thanks in Advance.

[Buck52]

I really not concerned about the rating decisions in 2002/2003. even Flip  H (aka Phillip Rogers) Notice this back then..we were greengos  back then and was just happy I got the IU with P&T & ChampVA 

which was a God send for us back then ,my spouse had to have open heart by pass  surgery the following months .in the VA Hospital  at Dallas  VAMC

 we had a lot of other things on our minds and just never Appeal it.

its the EED That just don't seem right...the retro should have been a lot more than 10.000 $

I am going to check with my Bank that this 10.000.00 was deposited in back in 2003   ...I realize that the payment back then is less than it is now and each year after that that we got a COLA  I think they just paid a year retro  from 2001-.2002  Although the DRO Mention they paid me from the date I filed for increase..Which was 1999,

But the retro I got back then don't reflect that   going from 50% to being paid at 100%  since 1999 to 2003 Just seems it should be more than that?

..but maybe they are right  I just need to make sure how much they paid me on this..I am still digging up records  going through my paper C-file and looking on my new CD new C-FILE.

Going through my records just seems that something is not right  like you mention the dates don't jive  and I was supprised to get the 50% increase   because I think my NOD had run out back then  this is when I found a DRO I never heard of I got one of his decision sheets in my C-FILE awarding the 50% in 1999...I received the 50% in 2000 (no retro on the 50% either ?)..but yet they have it I was rated 50% in 1998..so my records are All messed up.

Now I understand if its a typo then the benefit of it goes to the VA not the Veteran. in other words if they did a typo they made it more than once  its on at least 4 or 5 rating sheets and EOB's and decisions letters. but I understand the typos goes to the VA Favor.  unless I can prove CUE.

Edited September 7, 2018 by Buck52

[broncovet]

 Its obviously a complex issue..multiple issues, multiple decisons, multiple appeals.  As I mentioned earlier, you should take your file to an attorney.  

You can see "if he  is interested".  You dont have to decide yet, let him review your file and listen to what he has to say.  

In almost EVERY case, my attorney's found stuff that I had not thought of, and won with those.  The "entitlement theories" I thought were best, turned out to be unimportant.  

I keep saying this:  By hiring an attorney, you are not "losing" 20 percent, you are gaining 80 percent".  

As my father used to say, "Half a loaf is better than none".  Or, in your case 80 percent of the loaf is better than no loaf.  

[Buck52]

I agree with ya broncovet 

I am trying to scope through all my adjudicated records/rating sheets and decision  and checking with my Bank on the retros  one for the 50% increase  which as for as I know we never got any retro on that?

    and if I filed the claim back in 1998 and then got the 50% in 2000  they should have been some kind of retro?

  but don't think I got anything on the 50% back then...we were just over joyed that we got the 50%...I need to check with my Bank on both retros  I still have and use the same Bank I used back then we never changed Banks. as to where I have my VA comp coming in.

[HorizontalMike]

Everything Broncovet says is +10 on this issue. 

Especially about how attorneys find little but important things that the veteran never thinks of, that are good for the veteran's case.  During my first DRO appeal, which I taped, the DRO insisted that we(my attorney and I) must file a new FORM #8940 (that was NOT required at the time and was just being introduced into the VA system) that form was a "request" for an "increase" and NOT part of the APPEAL.  My appeal was then processed as a "new claim" incorrectly.

This is what my attorney (same firm as Broncovet) explained to me back in 2015:

"...The IU claim should be processed as an appeal. The reason it is showing as a “new” claim is because the VA now requires a form 8940 to be submitted before the DRO can decide a IU claim. What makes things confusing for the Regional Office is that the form 8940 is used to initiate a new claim for IU so many times it is logged as a “new” claim even though it is just a formality for consideration of the issue on appeal. This issue was brought up at our hearing and in our written arguments to the DRO so I don’t think it should be confused for a new claim. However, in the past with other claims at the Houston RO, we have seen the appeal get processed by one DRO and the IU claim (also on appeal) get processed by a different DRO. It doesn’t make any sense to me as to why they would do that but it’s the VA so most things they do don’t make sense to people like you and I..." 

And THAT was exactly what happened, our DRO appeal was treated as a "new" claim and only backdated to the most recent C&P date, for retro-compensation.  And that is why we are now at the BVA with out TDIU retro and SC for other appeals.  It should have been backdated an additional ~30month$ in retro.

Never put anything past the RO, and particularly the Houston RO.  I recently got an incorrect RAMP letter withdrawing my BVA appeals FROM THE RO!  The RO had already certified and activated my appeal to the BVA and the RO is out of the hierarchy if and until a remand.  This was the second time the RO has tried this stunt!  Ridiculous but true, so watch out for all actions and pay attention to where they are actually coming from.