Don't poke the bear.

[vetquest]

I went to file a claim for ED connected to neuropathy and PTSD medications.  I had a DBQ from my doctor and medical studies that neuropathy can cause ED.  My VSO actually to me not to poke the bear.  I was floored.  I wonder how many other veterans are being told this.  He said I could lose my 100% and SMC S for filing for ED.  He said that they were at a meeting with raters in the Nashville and were given this advice.  It makes me wonder who my VSO is working for.  I know they are paid by the state and not the VA but I seriously wonder who's best interests they have at heart.  I filed my claim anyway.

[jfrei]

BS to scare you they told me that when I filed for an increase to my TBI on 2016 when they said I was granted TDIU. I immediately filed for an increase waited it out another year of back and forth exams and magically it was 100% P and T backdated to when they approved me for TDIU. I’m not even messing with another long drugged out appeal for an EOD claim the RO will fight. The Bs we go through with the Va is ridiculous with the VBA I’ve had nothing but praise for my care and hospital treatment I’ve received since moving to the wilmington RO area...

[Buck52]

There's two kinds of VSO  in my opinion anywayz

Lazy ones  who like to collect and do nothing and Smart ones that take the veterans at heart. and work their claims.

Note : Its always best to keep in good commutation & in agreement with your VSO 

Attorney or Accredited Claims Agent

I worked all my claims myself and help from the good folks here on Hadit.

[broncovet]

The regulations are as follows:

Quote

3.344 Stabilization of disability evaluations.

(a)Examination reports indicating improvement. Rating agencies will handle cases affected by change of medical findings or diagnosis, so as to produce the greatest degree of stability of disability evaluations consistent with the laws and Department of Veterans Affairs regulations governing disability compensation and pension. It is essential that the entire record of examinations and the medical-industrial history be reviewed to ascertain whether the recent examination is full and complete, including all special examinations indicated as a result of general examination and the entire case history. This applies to treatment of intercurrent diseases and exacerbations, including hospital reports, bedside examinations, examinations by designated physicians, and examinations in the absence of, or without taking full advantage of, laboratory facilities and the cooperation of specialists in related lines. Examinations less full and complete than those on which payments were authorized or continued will not be used as a basis of reduction. Ratings on account of diseases subject to temporary or episodic improvement, e.g., manic depressive or other psychotic reaction, epilepsy, psychoneurotic reaction, arteriosclerotic heart disease, bronchial asthma, gastric or duodenal ulcer, many skin diseases, etc., will not be reduced on any one examination, except in those instances where all the evidence of record clearly warrants the conclusion that sustained improvement has been demonstrated. Ratings on account of diseases which become comparatively symptom free (findings absent) after prolonged rest, e.g. residuals of phlebitis, arteriosclerotic heart disease, etc., will not be reduced on examinations reflecting the results of bed rest. Moreover, though material improvement in the physical or mental condition is clearly reflected the rating agency will consider whether the evidence makes it reasonably certain that the improvement will be maintained under the ordinary conditions of life. When syphilis of the central nervous system or alcoholic deterioration is diagnosed following a long prior history of psychosis, psychoneurosis, epilepsy, or the like, it is rarely possible to exclude persistence, in masked form, of the preceding innocently acquired manifestations. Rating boards encountering a change of diagnosis will exercise caution in the determination as to whether a change in diagnosis represents no more than a progression of an earlier diagnosis, an error in prior diagnosis or possibly a disease entity independent of the service-connecteddisability. When the new diagnosis reflects mental deficiency or personality disorder only, the possibility of only temporary remission of a super-imposed psychiatric disease will be borne in mind.

(b)Doubtful cases. If doubt remains, after according due consideration to all the evidence developed by the several items discussed in paragraph (a) of this section, the rating agency will continue the rating in effect, citing the former diagnosis with the new diagnosis in parentheses, and following the appropriate code there will be added the reference “Rating continued pending reexamination ___ months from this date, § 3.344.” The rating agency will determine on the basis of the facts in each individual case whether 18, 24 or 30 months will be allowed to elapse before the reexamination will be made.

(c)Disabilities which are likely to improve. The provisions of paragraphs (a) and (b) of this section apply to ratings which have continued for long periods at the same level (5 years or more). They do not apply to disabilities which have not become stabilized and are likely to improve. Reexaminations disclosing improvement, physical or mental, in these disabilities will warrant reduction in rating.

[26 FR 1586, Feb. 24, 1961; 58 FR 53660, Oct. 18, 1993]

Additionally, according to VSO's:

Quote

Do not poke the bear, if you apply for an increase, you will be decreased instead.  

I suggest you apply the "first" regulation I posted and forget all about the second one.