Supplemental Claim

[deedub75]

I am at a complete loss here.  I submitted a supplemental claim in 2/3/2020 for where I claimed my back and both knees secondary to bilateral pes planus and right ankle injury.  The claim moved quickly and I had C&P exams on 3/13/2020.  I checked on eBenefits today and saw that they granted back and both knees and even added 4 more contentions that I had not claimed.  However, they made 2/3/2020 the effective date for all contentions which completely defeats the purpose of getting earlier effective dates for all my percentages.  I called DAV and they told me that they indeed finalized the claimed with 2/3/2020 as the effective date.  

These claims go back as far as around 2011 or 2012 and it ended up in appeal on 2013.  I had a DRO review it and it was denied again in 2014 so I sent it to BVA where it sat there until they were remanded in 2017.  I asked for a HLR in RAMP because I didn't want to wait for legacy BVA.  It was denied again in July 2019 and so I got a nexus letter from my personal ortho doctor and send it in as a supplemental claim in Feb 2020.  So I've basically kept these claims open since at least 2012.  I have no idea why in the world they would put my effective date as 2/3/2020 on the date they received my supplemental claim.  DAV says I should just send it directly to BVA and and ask for earlier effective date and they will sort it out.  They said if I send it for a HLR they will just regurgitate the same info and leave the date the same.

What say you?

[Buck52]

Just my 2 cents

I believe your  co worker manager is correct ,  when secondary claims are awarded  theY then become  in part of the original s.c. disability  and should keep the original claim date or EED.

[Guest]

BVA may or may not fix this. I understand that this evidence helped you win your service connection but as I stated VA will try their best to say that in 2011 and 2012 this evidence did not exist and you did not meet the rating criteria. Of course you have to do what you have to do but IMHO a HLR/DRO may not grant you your EED. Yes, then again the HLR/DRO might just grant what you want. My post is just that my opinion. I am not trying to discourage you, I am just telling you what I think happened. The fact that you might have to continue your claim back to BVA and beyond if you choose to.  VA is very sneaky and you have to prepare yourself for the next step. I am not sure what your rating is but granting this claim back to 2011 and 2012, VA knows that they would have to pay you the difference of each month over the last few years and VA will not do that without a fight.

[deedub75]

14 hours ago, pete992 said:

BVA may or may not fix this. I understand that this evidence helped you win your service connection but as I stated VA will try their best to say that in 2011 and 2012 this evidence did not exist and you did not meet the rating criteria. Of course you have to do what you have to do but IMHO a HLR/DRO may not grant you your EED. Yes, then again the HLR/DRO might just grant what you want. My post is just that my opinion. I am not trying to discourage you, I am just telling you what I think happened. The fact that you might have to continue your claim back to BVA and beyond if you choose to.  VA is very sneaky and you have to prepare yourself for the next step. I am not sure what your rating is but granting this claim back to 2011 and 2012, VA knows that they would have to pay you the difference of each month over the last few years and VA will not do that without a fight.

All thoughts are taken into consideration here.  It will go back the BVA since I have nothing to lose anyway.  When the BVA remanded it back to the original examiner in 5/18, he was very critical of the examiner's rationale.  

"The Board finds the examiner's rationale inadequate for decision making purposes.  See Barr v. Nicholson, 21 Vet. App. 303, 311 (2007).  The examiner's rationale notes that medical does not support a link between the Veteran's conditions and his right ankle disability, but the examiner does not indicate what research literature is used in forming her opinion.  Further, the examiner does not provide any medical rationale explaining why the Veteran's right ankle disability, and noted antalgic gait, did not cause or aggravate his current conditions.  As such, an addendum opinion is needed to adequately address medical reasoning behind the VA examiner's May 2017 opinion."

I went through RAMP looking for a quicker decision.  I didn't want my appeal taking an additional 3 years since in the legacy appeals system there were about 150,000 claims ahead of me.  My mistake!  I did get a quicker (wrong) decision.  The same NP examiner basically wrote the exact same medical opinions that the BVA said were inadequate.  Since I went through RAMP, I don't think the examiner was even required to follow the guidance in the remand letter.  At least this is what someone at DAV told me.  I feel like the BVA judge was leaning towards granting my claims.  I may try to upload a copy of it.  When I read it I was pissed because it was remanded but I was like wow he really came down on the examiner. 

[Guest]

8 hours ago, deedub75 said:

I went through RAMP looking for a quicker decision.  I didn't want my appeal taking an additional 3 years since in the legacy appeals system there were about 150,000 claims ahead of me.  My mistake!  I did get a quicker (wrong) decision.  The same NP examiner basically wrote the exact same medical opinions that the BVA said were inadequate.  Since I went through RAMP, I don't think the examiner was even required to follow the guidance in the remand letter.  At least this is what someone at DAV told me.  I feel like the BVA judge was leaning towards granting my claims.  I may try to upload a copy of it.  When I read it I was pissed because it was remanded but I was like wow he really came down on the examiner. 

I swear you guys are reading my file, so here we go again. Please be forwarded that even though your claim was remanded that does not mean when it returns to BVA it will be granted.  I was in a similar situation a few years ago and I was shocked that the BVA judge was on my side at least I thought.  When my VARO rejected and continued to deny my claim, the BVA judge changed his mind and denied my claim also.  I had to get a lawyer and continued my claim/appeal to CAVC where it was remanded by them and finally BVA granted my claim. Of course this only added more years. 

[deedub75]

22 minutes ago, pete992 said:

I swear you guys are reading my file, so here we go again. Please be forwarded that even though your claim was remanded that does not mean when it returns to BVA it will be granted.  I was in a similar situation a few years ago and I was shocked that the BVA judge was on my side at least I thought.  When my VARO rejected and continued to deny my claim, the BVA judge changed his mind and denied my claim also.  I had to get a lawyer and continued my claim/appeal to CAVC where it was remanded by them and finally BVA granted my claim. Of course this only added more years. 

My claim was finally approved because I got my own nexus letter and submitted it with a supplemental claim. The issue I have now is that they made the effective date the date of the supplemental claim when it should have been the original date I filed the claim. From my experience from my time working for the VA, it looks like an error. I have a couple of friends still working there and they both told me the date should go back to the original file date as long as I filed everything timely which I did. 

[Guest]

Yes, I agree. After my claim was remanded by CAVC, BVA granted it and remanded it back to the VARO who not only low balled my rating but screwed up my effective date. I finally won my rating but not my effective date so my claim went back to BVA and finally won my EED from my original claim.