C&P Nexus of opinion inadequate?

[doc25]

Would this be an inadequate nexus of opinion?

The examiner clearly marked that it "at least as likely as not" incurred in service, but in the rationale just concurred with a previous C&P exam rationale.

Full 2nd C&P exam Nexus_Redacted.pdf

Edited May 12, 2019 by doc25

[GeekySquid]

11 minutes ago, doc25 said:

don't even know what a 5103 is. Flub my luck. 

@doc25

The 5103 is the notice of what you need to support your claim. the evidence you need.

https://www.benefits.va.gov/COMPENSATION/notice.asp

I really don't follow what you are saying in the first line of answer 6. will you please clarify for me.. " For an exit C&P exam, is a Benefits Disability claim on Discharge. " are you saying your military exit exam is ALSO a Benefits Disability Claim? that interpretation seems odd to me. I have never heard it put that way.

It is just my opinion, but with the complexity of this situation asking a VA accredited lawyer, maybe from NOVA, might be your best option. Even just a free consultation just to make sure all those things (or at least some of them) are the legal problems they seem to be.

The VA gets away with murder  because NONE of us was ever issued a VA-to-Human dictionary or a crash course in "VA" before we filed our claims. We all learn by the school of hard knocks and it sucks. I can envision the VA continuing to fight this using many of those same statements.

i personally read all your response to hinge on the words congenital and developmental. They seemed to have been pulled out of thin air with no supporting documentation. I still don't know what that handwriting is on your entrance physical but the circled item is clear. It is possible that writing refers to some other medical term that means congenital or developmental.  if so I would still make the VA clarify where those characterizations came from and why they are accepted without supporting evidence.

The rater cannot make a medical diagnosis. period. even the VA "expert" they might have consulted cannot do a paper-diagnosis as they are not the C&P doc or the treating doc.

I would also make sure in any appeal you file from here on in to request the VA provide the credentials, certifications, publications and other proof that ALL the people who dealt with your claim have be added to your C-file. This will help preserve a legal claim at higher court to challenge the competency of the doctors and their findings.

The Veterans Law Blog has stuff on how to put that demand in your appeal and I think it might be here too. Chris Attig has articles here a lot and that may be one of them.

There is also AskNod on here who may (or may not) take you on as a client.

[doc25]

9 minutes ago, GeekySquid said:

@doc25

The 5103 is the notice of what you need to support your claim. the evidence you need.

https://www.benefits.va.gov/COMPENSATION/notice.asp

I really don't follow what you are saying in the first line of answer 6. will you please clarify for me.. " For an exit C&P exam, is a Benefits Disability claim on Discharge. " are you saying your military exit exam is ALSO a Benefits Disability Claim? that interpretation seems odd to me. I have never heard it put that way.

It is just my opinion, but with the complexity of this situation asking a VA accredited lawyer, maybe from NOVA, might be your best option. Even just a free consultation just to make sure all those things (or at least some of them) are the legal problems they seem to be.

The VA gets away with murder  because NONE of us was ever issued a VA-to-Human dictionary or a crash course in "VA" before we filed our claims. We all learn by the school of hard knocks and it sucks. I can envision the VA continuing to fight this using many of those same statements.

i personally read all your response to hinge on the words congenital and developmental. They seemed to have been pulled out of thin air with no supporting documentation. I still don't know what that handwriting is on your entrance physical but the circled item is clear. It is possible that writing refers to some other medical term that means congenital or developmental.  if so I would still make the VA clarify where those characterizations came from and why they are accepted without supporting evidence.

The rater cannot make a medical diagnosis. period. even the VA "expert" they might have consulted cannot do a paper-diagnosis as they are not the C&P doc or the treating doc.

I would also make sure in any appeal you file from here on in to request the VA provide the credentials, certifications, publications and other proof that ALL the people who dealt with your claim have be added to your C-file. This will help preserve a legal claim at higher court to challenge the competency of the doctors and their findings.

The Veterans Law Blog has stuff on how to put that demand in your appeal and I think it might be here too. Chris Attig has articles here a lot and that may be one of them.

There is also AskNod on here who may (or may not) take you on as a client.

The handwriting is hallux valgus aka bunions. That does run in my family. That's probably where the congenital bs diagnosis is coming from. But hallux valgus is a totally different disability that I never complained about.

 

[GeekySquid]

12 minutes ago, doc25 said:

The handwriting is hallux valgus aka bunions. That does run in my family.

@doc25

if that is correct and that is where congenital comes from you are on the money and will win your claim.

as a side note I never knew bunions were hereditary... I learned something new

I just ran across a report on VA Lay Evidence and its value in VA courts. It is from 2012. attached it here as you might be interested

jhch.pdf

Edited May 13, 2019 by GeekySquid
attach file

[doc25]

18 hours ago, GeekySquid said:

@doc25

if that is correct and that is where congenital comes from you are on the money and will win your claim.

as a side note I never knew bunions were hereditary... I learned something new

I just ran across a report on VA Lay Evidence and its value in VA courts. It is from 2012. attached it here as you might be interested

jhch.pdf 669.07 kB · 1 download

Yea, I won't argue with the VA that bunions are congenital, but my flat feet are not. Both my parents had normal arches. Bunions are on my mom's side. 

This last denial letter does mention that my lay evidence was incompetent. Just my luck. ha ha.

I wasn't self diagnosing in my statement in support of the claim; I was already diagnosed in-service, and the lay evidence my wife wrote was her objective view of my symptoms from when we she first knew me to the present.

Edited May 13, 2019 by doc25

[GeekySquid]

1 minute ago, doc25 said:

this last denial letter does mention that my lay evidence was incompetent. Just my luck. ha ha.

 

I would look into challenging the determination of competence. VA gives itself wide latitude to say what is competent but the courts don't really rely on that. Check out the BVA and CAVC opinions....remands everywhere on that issue.

[doc25]

1 minute ago, GeekySquid said:

 

I would look into challenging the determination of competence. VA gives itself wide latitude to say what is competent but the courts don't really rely on that. Check out the BVA and CAVC opinions....remands everywhere on that issue.

Will do.