BAV appeal

[ShrekTheTank]

So I may answer my own question here and I think I am correct.

When a remand is sent from the RO back to the BVA is that the RO suggesting what to do?  I thought once they put that on their then it was implemented, but it makes sense this would be for the judge to look at.

If so then I understand why I am not at 100% yet.  

The judge approved the % today and also sent the date back to 2013 which would be correct.  

[Berta]

This seems to be confusing-----

I only had one case at the BVA ( A prior BVA appeal was dismissed because by then I had won that claim at the RO level.I didn't know then I should have withdrawn the appeal)

and I had 3 IMOs. They (BVA) had two negative C & P exams, and remanded for another posthumous C & P exam.

I gave argument on the third exam, and sent it directly to the BVA, with my docket #,.as the BVA wanted a Cardio opinion, but I got a PA opinion, and I  could easily knock down the medical stuff in the exam, as it was too speculative.

I ordered a cardio IMO as well, but the BVA award came before the cardio IMO I paid for.

It is not unusual for a claim to be sent back to the BVA.

"After following the BVA’s orders, the regional office will issue a new decision.  If the Regional Office grants your claim, you will receive a rating decision with a Notice of Action letter explaining your grant.  If after the additional development the Regional Office again denies your claim, you will receive a Supplemental Statement of the Case explaining the denial and your case will go back before the Board for review.  "

https://cck-law.com/blog/happens-va-appeal-remanded/

I mentioned here over the years that a claimant should follow the remand themselves- as they might have whatever the BVA asked the VARO to do-

say the RO denied a PTSD claim saying JSRRC could not verify the veteran's stressor=but the veteran themself wrote to JSRRC and got verification of their stressor- and sends it to the BVA, as that might have been the reason for the remand. 

In my case, I had 3 favorable IMOs for my claim and BVA wanted a third VA C & P result.

I had ordered my 4th IMO because I wanted to get higher than relative equipoise-one of my IMOs as only 2 paragraphs long and a freebee. But my evidence, in addition to the IMOs was staggering.

The award says"

"3.  The weight of the competent evidence is at least in 
relative equipoise on the questions of whether the Veteran 
had diabetes during his lifetime that was caused by Agent 
Orange exposure during his Vietnam service, and whether that 
diabetes caused or contributed substantially or materially in 
causing the Veteran's death."

I hoped they would say the claimant had a S--- load of evidence. 

Only because if they had listed the evidence I had, it could have helped others who read BVA decisions -that hold a wealth of information, and rationales as to why they denied or why they awarded.
 

 

 

 

 

[broncovet]

Hmmm, I was right, not that its that important to be "right".  

You posted:

Quote

So the RO completed the remand instructions and then updated ebenefits with the 60% rating of what I assume is their recommendation of where the claim should be. 

I never tire of telling people to not take as Gospel what Ebenefits says...its notoriously unreliable.  Speculating (guessing) what ebenefits means when they say  ______, is rarely productive.  You have to wait for then envelope.  

Now, provided that ebenefits has a "letter" you can print that says you are 60 percent SC, that is usually a different story.  VA does not want us running around with letters that say we are xx% Service connected when we are not.  

Its pretty much a waste of time to argue "well ebenefits says____, so does that mean____?"   It always means almost nothing.  Its about as relevant as the weather to your rating.  

[toddt]

What do you mean by "applied" and "implemented"?  Do you mean when do you get paid for the increase in your disability percentage?  If so, it can be right away or it can take several months.   

Edited November 9, 2019 by toddt
correct sentence

[paulstrgn]

18 hours ago, shrekthetank1 said:

Also Should I hear about P&T in this decision?  It does bump me to the 100% club

Shrek when I hit the 100% P&T club I only found out by printing out the letter in eBenefits which indcated I was P&T as of 8/15/2018, I was very happy to discover this fact. The only reference in my decision letter was the part about the educational benefits (which at first I did not realize).

I am confused why the RO needed to send back the remand to the BVA if they agreed with the remand then why send it back. Unless they did  not agree with the BVA? I work for a Federal agency (not the VA) and if we don't agree with the decison (like from the BVA) we appeal it back to them and state our case why we think they are wrong.

For me (it may be different for others) I have always found eBenefits to be reliable with the information posted there.

[paulstrgn]

My one and only BVA decision took 30 days to be given a percentage by the RO after the BVA grant (no remands). Now with that being said I did have to file a HLR for the correct EED and percentage for hypertension) which took an additional 30 days for the EED but I am still waiting on the hypertension rating.

[ShrekTheTank]

1 minute ago, paulstrgn said:

Shrek when I hit the 100% P&T club I only found out by printing out the letter in eBenefits which indcated I was P&T as of 8/15/2018, I was very happy to discover this fact. The only reference in my decision letter was the part about the educational benefits (which at first I did not realize).

I am confused why the RO needed to send back the remand to the BVA if they agreed with the remand then why send it back. Unless they did  not agree with the BVA? I work for a Federal agency (not the VA) and if we don't agree with the decison (like from the BVA) we appeal it back to them and state our case why we think they are wrong.

For me (it may be different for others) I have always found eBenefits to be reliable with the information posted there.

So yes there are a few more issues which probably caused the issue.  The RO disagreed with the Judge and tried to combine the Dercum's disease and scaring.  The Judge told them not to touch the scaring, so it is still effective, but from what the VFW told me is they are still separate and service connected/

They did deny my PTSD.  So I will appeal to the CAVC for that one.  I am assuming one of these issues caused it to go back to the board