Why 2nd C&P exam for same issue

[misskittens]

Hey,

I was put in for and increase for my 80 percent decision. I did completed and exam after the decision and now they want me to do another one. Can anyone tell me why?

 

Edited August 9, 2020 by misskittens
wording

[Berta]

That is difficult to know why-perhaps the first C &P exam was deficient in some way.

Have you tried to obtain a copy of the first exam?

[USMC_VET]

Its hard to say, if you have multiple claims it could be one was for the increase the other was for something somewhat related to another claim but had a related issue. for example i had an increase in for PTSD and for OSA service connection. since my claim for OSA was related to PTSD they did multiple (3 actually) mental health exams.

If thats not the case sometimes its because the rater got the first one and didnt think it answered the questions he needed to finish the claim, etc.  Its not always malicious in terms of "it was too favorable" although thats sometimes the case, it could have been just poorly written out or didnt go over specific items that relate to your claim

[Vync]

After my recent C&P exam, I have concerns about the quality of the examiners. The VARO is "supposed" to thoroughly review the exam findings. If anything is incomplete or inadequate, they can ask the examiner to either clarify or redo the exam.

[jfrei]

I can say with certainty that they missed something in the first one, the second, and third. And after 4 exams for my tbi I was going crazy.  But in my case the doctor failed to report something....

Edited August 12, 2020 by jfrei

[El Train]

I had 5 c&p's for TBI initial claim and PTSD increase.  4 of them were 'at least as likley as not' in my favor.  I had one bad c&p out of the 5.  I contested this one to the VARO.  Later I was awarded 100% P&T.  When I got my C-file recently, They had 2 Psyc Dr.s (none which did a C&P) comparing all the C&P's. One of them actually was siding with the bad C&P Dr's evaluation as me being an unreliable reporter.  In other words, a liar.  The other one ruled in my favor as being a reliable reporter and the two negative opinions didn't make any sense.  It worked out in my favor, but they had a couple of Docs try to side rail my claim.