Jump to content
VA Disability Community via Hadit.com

VA Disability Claims Articles

Ask Your VA Claims Question | Current Forum Posts Search | Rules | View All Forums
VA Disability Articles | Chats and Other Events | Donate | Blogs | New Users

  • hohomepage-banner-2024-2.png

  • 27-year-anniversary-leaderboard.png

    advice-disclaimer.jpg

  • donate-be-a-hero.png

  • 0

Are Ratings Officers having a bad attitude towards claimant's?

Rate this question


doc25

Question

§4.23   Attitude of rating officers.
It is to be remembered that the majority of applicants are disabled persons who are seeking benefits of law to which they believe themselves entitled. In the exercise of his or her functions, rating officers must not allow their personal feelings to intrude; an antagonistic, critical, or even abusive attitude on the part of a claimant should not in any instance influence the officers in the handling of the case. Fairness and courtesy must at all times be shown to applicants by all employees whose duties bring them in contact, directly or indirectly, with the Department's claimants.

It doesn't take a genius to figure ratings officers ARE NOT applying this statute. It seems like they disregard all and any probative evidence that would substantiate a veteran's claim. 

Any thoughts?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Answers 6
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters For This Question

Top Posters For This Question

6 answers to this question

Recommended Posts

  • 1

They're cockroaches plain and simple.

As soon as you turn the light on with VA laws and regulations they scatter away and back into the dark. When I do visit the RO I see them walking in during around lunch time with their badges showing security. Since dropping the DAV, for that I saw the stat percentages of them being the highest and was fooled, fooled me once, and I'm not fooled the second time!  In Sept 2017, I lawyer up, I never went back and frankly don't need to with the help of this website because I HADIT!

They denied me even with my three disabilities being presumptive and lowed balled me on the 4th.  So now I'm claiming CUE within my IME. The nexus letter went from 12 pages to 15 for it, since, I added how CUEs are not rare at 7.23% a year, since 1994, and that the fact that I was denied within the year of getting out and still in the presumptive time frame is a violation of my CFR 4.6. I put it right above the middle of the first page and below Dear VA RO who can't read and violated my 4.6 and 3.317 rights THIS IS A CUE. Also here's Johnny with the Writ of Mandamus! (thank myself for taking that addition how to write research papers course in college)

It reminds me of playing NES Legend of Zelda as a child and the designers of the game taught me about the real world. People are lazy and if they can get away with being lazy they damn well will be until you put the spot light on them.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 0

"It seems like they disregard all and any probative evidence that would substantiate a veteran's claim."

That is when the veteran can file a CUE against them under violation of 38 CFR 4.6.

They have done that to me many times.My Probative evidence they ignored was IMOs by a doctor with expertise that outweighed the C & P doctors, my husband's 6 page autopsy, and even a Peer Review ( favorable to my FTCA charges, and a VA Central Review from VA's top cardio doctor, ordered by the OGC.)

All of above is highly probative evidence. That is, it could stand alone to prove the claim.

The most recent claim they did this on, is the reason for  my recent VACO complaint and will be sent to the OAWB.

They immediately reversed their denial when I filed CUE under 38 CFR 4.6.

I do not even believe a medical person did the posthumous C & P exam. Regardless of the fact that they ultimately awarded in less than a month (I filed the CUE the same day I got the denial,) I am sick and tired of having this done to me multiple times by this VARO , and outraged when I see this happens to many here, so this time-I am prepared to make a big stink about it. If I ever do get a copy of the actual C & P exam.

If I dont get it, I will use their rhetoric that is in the denial letter.

I consider some of the  C & P exams I have gotten to be indicative of malpractice-meaning if the examiner was also treating veterans, their lack of medical knowledge in preparing a C & P exam, could also become malpractice ,when they treat veterans.

But as I have found out long ago- a C & P exam described in a SOC might sure not be what the actual exam says.

 

 

 

 

 

"§ 4.6 Evaluation of evidence.

The element of the weight to be accorded the character of the veteran's service is but one factor entering into the considerations of the rating boards in arriving at determinations of the evaluation of disability. Every element in any way affecting the probative value to be assigned to the evidence in each individual claim must be thoroughly and conscientiously studied by each member of the rating board in the light of the established policies of the Department of

Veterans Affairs

to the end that decisions will be equitable and just as contemplated by the requirements of the law."

38 CFR 4.6

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 0
  • HadIt.com Elder

I agree with ms Berta

When you get an examiner that don't know what the helll he/she is doing or don't bother to read all your evidence  usually your exam will go south

It only causes  the veteran to appeal in most cases  and a waist of time

(when they could have got it right the first time)

What a veteran can do  to help his claim I did this  for my claims and it seem to work ok.

Make sure you present your claim in a eazy way for the rater to read it, , if you high-lite the parts of the evidence you want them to be sure to read  do that, what I did also  I made the letters larger in that area I wanted  them to read   so it would be there staring them in the eye..it may or may not help but I had never had a denial when I did that.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 0
3 hours ago, Berta said:

"It seems like they disregard all and any probative evidence that would substantiate a veteran's claim."

That is when the veteran can file a CUE against them under violation of 38 CFR 4.6.

They have done that to me many times.My Probative evidence they ignored was IMOs by a doctor with expertise that outweighed the C & P doctors, my husband's 6 page autopsy, and even a Peer Review ( favorable to my FTCA charges, and a VA Central Review from VA's top cardio doctor, ordered by the OGC.)

All of above is highly probative evidence. That is, it could stand alone to prove the claim.

The most recent claim they did this on, is the reason for  my recent VACO complaint and will be sent to the OAWB.

They immediately reversed their denial when I filed CUE under 38 CFR 4.6.

I do not even believe a medical person did the posthumous C & P exam. Regardless of the fact that they ultimately awarded in less than a month (I filed the CUE the same day I got the denial,) I am sick and tired of having this done to me multiple times by this VARO , and outraged when I see this happens to many here, so this time-I am prepared to make a big stink about it. If I ever do get a copy of the actual C & P exam.

If I dont get it, I will use their rhetoric that is in the denial letter.

I consider some of the  C & P exams I have gotten to be indicative of malpractice-meaning if the examiner was also treating veterans, their lack of medical knowledge in preparing a C & P exam, could also become malpractice ,when they treat veterans.

But as I have found out long ago- a C & P exam described in a SOC might sure not be what the actual exam says.

 

 

 

 

 

"§ 4.6 Evaluation of evidence.

The element of the weight to be accorded the character of the veteran's service is but one factor entering into the considerations of the rating boards in arriving at determinations of the evaluation of disability. Every element in any way affecting the probative value to be assigned to the evidence in each individual claim must be thoroughly and conscientiously studied by each member of the rating board in the light of the established policies of the Department of

Veterans Affairs

to the end that decisions will be equitable and just as contemplated by the requirements of the law."

38 CFR 4.6

 

I had a flat feet denial twice and both were denied on the premise that I had congenital flat feet. Which my entrance exam clearly shows I had normal archs in 1998. Then, 7 yrs later I was diagnosed with flat feet in-service. According to my research, I know I have acquired flat feet also known as flexible flat feet; not congenital. I know I'm at least 30% now.

 Severe: Flat foot is considered severe if there is obvious deformity (like pronation and abduction), significant pain, swelling, and calluses that are built up in abnormal areas. If only one foot has it, then it is rated 20%. If both feet have severe flat foot, then it is rated 30% total.

Broncovet gave me some advice to:

#1. Get it SC.

#2. Then to the effective date from back in 2007. Using CUE.

I was getting livid and I thought I could use CUE from the beginning. Not so fast doc25. ha ha.

I asked  Dr. Bash to help with the DBQ and a nexus of opinion for new and material evidence to re-open my claim. He's already reviewed all my medical evidence. I obtained the C&P exam from 2007 and there are discrepancies that I noticed right off the bat. The Physician Assistant DID NOT provide a rationale. It was merely speculation on the part of the examiner. At least, from my perspective. 

EntranceExam98.pdf

C&Pfeetexampg1.pdf

C&Pflatfeetpg2.pdf

In-service Dx.pdf

Edited by doc25
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 0
  • HadIt.com Elder

Yes they been known to do that more times that one.

Like if a Veteran has a Hearing exam at the time  he enters the military  chances are his hearing was ok at that time, however if he was around loud sudden noise while in military  without hearing protection due to his MOS or served in Combat  chances are he damage his inner ear ,  this is known to be Noise Induced Hearing loss and most of the time its Bilateral  that worsen over time.

  a Qualified Dr can give his opine on that, that he Noise the Veteran was around while serving in the military is likely as not related to his now hearing loss and tinnitus.

Remember  Raters are not Dr's so they rely on C&P Examiners that are Dr's to file their exam report after examining the veteran and some raters do use some common sense and read the medical Manuel  about that the Veteran condition  if the evidence the veteran presents in his claim reflects what in the Manual and what the C&P Examiner mention  if that is favorable to his/her claim  an award is due  but often a denial is there...And Appeal time for the Veteran  this happens a lot unfortunately.

Appeal usually with  NOD ( Notice of Disagreement.)  21-9058

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
×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

Guidelines and Terms of Use