Intent To File

[Fat]

In 2012, I  was denied for left knee laxity as a secondary condition to left knee arthritis.

 

I recently came across medical documentation in my file regarding two complaints/incidents of a loose knee while on active duty.

 

I know to get a previous denial opened you would need a supplemental claim form; however can I file left knee laxity on a direct service basis with intent to file?

 

Or do I have to go back through the denied secondary connection route with a supplemental claim?

 

All answers are welcomed.

[Buck52]

 In my opinion this is bad information

''File the claim, dont mess with ITF.  ITF reminds me of calling McDonalds to tell them you plan to visit next year. ''

 

"INTENT TO FILE" A CLAIM

Before applying for benefits a veteran or the surviving spouse of a veteran (in either case, the claimant) may wish to establish an Effective Date by using an "Intent to File" form (VBA Form 21-0966). "Intent to File," formerly known as an Informal Claim, can be sent to VA even though a claimant is not yet prepared to apply. This is done to 'lock-in a date' while the claimant is gathering supporting evidence to include in their application. Supporting evidence can take time to gather and may include any of the following:

.Military Records

.Doctor's Examinations and other Medical Evidence

.Marriage and Death Certificates

.Banks Statements

.Statements from Care Providers

 

Using an "Intent to File" to establish an Effective Date before the claimant has sufficiently prepared his or her application will allow the claimant to receive a larger lump sum retroactive payment than he or she otherwise would have. 

Source: Senior Veterans service Alliance.

[broncovet]

Buck, we must be in "Groundhog Day".  We disagreed on ITF before, and here we are again.  I see "0" benefit to ITF, except to VA.  Its just "one more thing" VA can mess up.  

Sample:

   Veteran A files an ITF.  He gathers information sends it in, and, "Let's assume" VA does not mess it up.  He gets the same effective date as Veteran B, below, so, in this senario there are no benefits, just the additional risk of VA messing it up.  

   Veteran B "does not" file an ITF. He files a "claim".  He, too, gathers information and sends it in.  He gets the same effective date as Veteran A, who filed an ITF on the same date.  But he foregoes some risks:

Risk of ITF 1.  VA "overlooks" ITF and grants at wrong effective date.  At least one Veteran on hadit said that happened to him.  

Risk of ITF 2.  The Veteran gets carried away and does not gather or send in the applicable evidence or sends it to the wrong place, or, VA loses it.  

Risk of ITF 3 VA loses the ITF.  (This would not be the first favorable piece of evidence VA lost).  Result:  Veteran loses retro.  

    Why take "unnecessary" risks?  Especially when the benefit is zero?  

    Go ahead, file an ITF if you like, but dont blame me if it does not work out well for you.  VA regulations are complex enough WITHOUT ITF, so why make it worse?  

[Buck52]

I have to disagree with your analogy reasoning why its not good to file a ITF.

How do you figure this?

''Veteran A files an ITF.  He gathers information sends it in, and, "Let's assume" VA does not mess it up.  He gets the same effective date as Veteran B, below, so, in this senario there are no benefits, just the additional risk of VA messing it up.''  

he would not get the same effective date.  the veteran that files the ITF would get a year extra as his effective date by filing the ITF.

It is the Veteran Choice to File the ITF. He can research the ITF and make his/her own decision as to rather or not File the ITF. 

Now if the Veteran is in dire-straights or home-less And don't have the time to file the ITF and needs his claim process by any and all means the fastest way  then yeah maybe he don't need to be filing the ITF.

In my opinion that is the only true reason not to be filing the ITF. 

I AM NOT GOING TO ARGUE WITH YOU BRONCOVET  You believe what you think and let the Veteran make his/her choice as to rather or not its in their best Interest to file the ITF or Not.

Edited September 5, 2020 by Buck52

[Buck52]

broncovet

''Go ahead, file an ITF if you like, but dont blame me if it does not work out well for you.  VA regulations are complex enough WITHOUT ITF, so why make it worse? ''

I FILED TWO ITF's AND THEY BOTH WORKED OUT WELL FOR ME.

I won't blame you or any veteran  if they file a ITF and it don't work out for them, then that is on the veteran for filing it incorrectly .

No one to blame but the Veteran him self.   as in any case where a veteran files for him self and not represented by a experienced well informed VSO or an VA Attorney or Certified Accredited VA Claims Agent.  (NOT TO MENTION EVEN THE BEST REPS CAN MESS UP AT TIMES) NO ONE IS PERFECT.

Edited September 5, 2020 by Buck52
Spelling

[Buck52]

I think its time to move on and let the veterans decide what is best for him/her  how to file or rather or not to file the ITF.

It's the Veteran choice.

I am moving on  enough said about the ITF Claims.

[GBArmy]

Agree. Let's move on!