Compensation Service Case Review

[JSwizzle]

Hello,

My claim has been sitting with a status of compensation service case review on va.gov & e-benefits for about 5 weeks now. Does anyone know what this means? I've tried looking it up but have found very little info. Thanks in advance

-Justin

[broncovet]

It means you will have to wait for a decision, and you may never know, internally within VA, why.  The Va is not very forthcoming in their entire compensation process, and we are not privy to all the goings on inside VA.  

If its worth it to you, you could apply to work at the VA, and you would know more.  However, even advice from "inside VA" is not always unbiased, and its not necessarily in your best interests.  

Example:  On another Veterans website I was advised by a person who alleges he has been a va rater and trainer for 20 years to basically withdraw my claim as it had zero chance of succeeding.  Instead of taking his advice, I appealed, and, eventually won everything I had asked for.  

You see, there seems to be a "disconnect" between BVA appeals, and VARO.  In this instance the rater advised that "tdiu under 38 cfr 4.16 b (extra schedular tdiu) was so rare that it was not worth persuing.  In my appeals to the BVA, I specifically asked BVA for "extra scheduler consideration" under 4.16b, as I was not even previously considered for it.   This ex Va employee basically "scoffed" and said nobody gets 4.16 b consideration.  I responded that "What was the regulation (4.16b) there for if VARO was determined to ignore it?  Allow me to post what it says:

 

Quote

(b) It is the established policy of the Department of Veterans Affairs that all veterans who are unable to secure and follow a substantially gainful occupation by reason of service-connected disabilities shall be rated totally disabled. Therefore, rating boards should submit to the Director, Compensation Service, for extra-schedular consideration all cases of veterans who are unemployable by reason of service-connected disabilities, but who fail to meet the percentage standards set forth in paragraph (a) of this section. The rating board will include a full statement as to the veteran's service-connected disabilities, employment history, educational and vocational attainment and all other factors having a bearing on the issue.

Does the term "all Veterans" sound like its "rare" to you?  Notice the term "shall" be rated totally disabled.  "Shall" means they are required to do so, where "may" gives the VARO discretion to do so or not.  

The board agreed with me and awarded benefits in conflict with raters who said its not happening.  

[Hucast21]

1 hour ago, broncovet said:

It means you will have to wait for a decision, and you may never know, internally within VA, why.  The Va is not very forthcoming in their entire compensation process, and we are not privy to all the goings on inside VA.  

If its worth it to you, you could apply to work at the VA, and you would know more.  However, even advice from "inside VA" is not always unbiased, and its not necessarily in your best interests.  

Example:  On another Veterans website I was advised by a person who alleges he has been a va rater and trainer for 20 years to basically withdraw my claim as it had zero chance of succeeding.  Instead of taking his advice, I appealed, and, eventually won everything I had asked for.  

You see, there seems to be a "disconnect" between BVA appeals, and VARO.  In this instance the rater advised that "tdiu under 38 cfr 4.16 b (extra schedular tdiu) was so rare that it was not worth persuing.  In my appeals to the BVA, I specifically asked BVA for "extra scheduler consideration" under 4.16b, as I was not even previously considered for it.   This ex Va employee basically "scoffed" and said nobody gets 4.16 b consideration.  I responded that "What was the regulation (4.16b) there for if VARO was determined to ignore it?  Allow me to post what it says:

 

Does the term "all Veterans" sound like its "rare" to you?  Notice the term "shall" be rated totally disabled.  "Shall" means they are required to do so, where "may" gives the VARO discretion to do so or not.  

The board agreed with me and awarded benefits in conflict with raters who said its not happening.  

Does this va rater go by the username of Cruiser? That guy thinks he knows everything lol.

Edited March 25, 2021 by Hucast21
.

[Berta]

I don't think cruiser is still a rater-I wonder if he  ever really worked for VA.

When I corrected him ,with evidence from VA case law, on some ridiculous advice he gave 

veterans , a few years ago at that site, they banned me from the site.

However they did leave my correction up on the site.

Vet sites who condone bad advice loose members.

Worse of all ,is that bad advice , supported by no case law or regulation, hurts veterans and their survivors.

 

 

 

 

[broncovet]

Yep, its cruiser.  And, like Berta, I got banned for correcting Cruiser.  I wasnt buying Cruisers position that 38 cfr 4.16b, where it says, 

Quote

ALL Veterans who are unable to work due to service connected disabilities SHALL be rated as totally disabled.

..actually means, according to cruiser, ALL Veterans who are unable to work due to SC disabilites will be denied because "I" have 20 years experience at the VA and because I say so."  

This is exactly the "culture of denial" at VARO.  Its why we have to appeal to win benefits and that takes forever.  

[Hucast21]

1 hour ago, Berta said:

I don't think cruiser is still a rater-I wonder if he  ever really worked for VA.

When I corrected him ,with evidence from VA case law, on some ridiculous advice he gave 

veterans , a few years ago at that site, they banned me from the site.

However they did leave my correction up on the site.

Vet sites who condone bad advice loose members.

Worse of all ,is that bad advice , supported by no case law or regulation, hurts veterans and their survivors.

 

 

 

 

I got into it with Cruiser because I explained that my initial claim had a ton of in-service documentation about my conditions but I ended up with an unfavorable C&P exam, which ended up in a denial.

I asked the forum about obtaining an IMO/IME, and Cruiser gave me crap for it stating if the C&P examiner didn’t find a nexus then I shouldn’t be “fishing” for service-connection.

I then posted screenshots of my STRs showing how ridiculous his opinion was and how incompetent C&P examiners are at the VA. I left the forum shortly after and came here.

Edited March 25, 2021 by Hucast21

[Berta]

I went over to do a search at VBN a few minutes ago and was surprised at how many there had thanked me for my advice- over many years.

I was banned there once before because I gave a widow who needed a lot of help- our hadit addy, in my profile.

MANY stuck up for me and the webmaster contacted me to come back-but I didnt for years.

After that happened I noticed many members were telling widows to  come here for DIC help.

Unfortunately-when it happened here-about a year ago -I corrected someone who was giving bad advice- I was surprised at the crap I got here.

That is why my time at hadit has become limited. And I did file 3 separate submissions of evidence in a complaint on them to the OGC. The complaint went way beyond the issues here.That is in progress.