Filing a new claim - Risk to existing service connection?

[Chuck-55]

I have a combined rating of (85%) ie 90% for 4 claims; Hearing-0, tinnitis-10, lumbar-40 (Broken down into left leg 20 & 20 and the right leg 20 & 20 which equals a bi-lateral rating)  My neck was denied as service connected.  I'ved been told not to pursue the denied claim because it would open up the accepted claims to scrutiny and possibly denial.  Any opinions on this?

[63Charlie]

I applied for Individual Unemployability a few years ago based upon my 70% rating of service connected disabilities.

The St. Pete VARO sent me for a general C&P exam where the VA re-examined ALL of my service connected disabilities, INCLUDING static conditions.

The examiner was factually incorrect in that she noted improvement on chronic, static disabilities.

It is very unfortunate that the VA utilizes C&P examiners that willfully misrepresent the facts to reduce a veterans benefits.

With all of the religious symbols the examiner had on display, I mistakenly assumed the exam would be fair.

Far from it.

Concerning all matters VA... I believe YMMV.

After this experience, how can one NOT have negativity?

Edited January 24, 2020 by 63Charlie

[broncovet]

Whats "YMMV"?????

Ok, so you had c and p's for all conditions, Charlie.  Did they reduce you?  

Because of Rice, there is no "stand alone" claim for tdiu.  Instead its a claim for increase to include tdiu.  

Source:  https://www.knowva.ebenefits.va.gov/system/templates/selfservice/va_ssnew/help/customer/locale/en-US/portal/554400000001018/content/554400000015191/Rice-v.-Shinseki,-May-6,-2009,-22-Vet.App.-447

 

Edited January 24, 2020 by broncovet

[63Charlie]

3 minutes ago, broncovet said:

Whats "YMMV"?????

Ok, so you had c and p's for all conditions, Charlie.  Did they reduce you?  

Because of Rice, there is no "stand alone" claim for tdiu.  Instead its a claim for increase to include tdiu.  

Source:  https://www.knowva.ebenefits.va.gov/system/templates/selfservice/va_ssnew/help/customer/locale/en-US/portal/554400000001018/content/554400000015191/Rice-v.-Shinseki,-May-6,-2009,-22-Vet.App.-447

 

YMMV = "your mileage may vary"

A RVSR would have reduced my benefits if a DRO hadn't stepped in.

My DRO review was stagnant for a couple of years.

I mailed the VARO a direct letter informing them of the delay.

My letter prompted action on the de novo review which saved me from reduction.

The  de novo review by a DRO, considered the age 55 and above  protection veterans are allowed against reductions, and instead chose to grant TDIU to the date I received the 70% rating.

I was also granted 100% scheduler from new evidence but the DRO failed to grant eight other disabilities which I must prove service connection.

So, I wait.

tic-toc