Legit Organizations To Help with Filing Claim from 90% to 100%

[Top G]

** Edited:  Included my VA decision letter from 2009 with medical descriptions and percentages awarded.

I'm a Service-Connected Disability Rating of 90% with just over 20-years of active duty in the USMC.  I've been retired since 2009 with my 90% rating ever since.  Since then, some of my documented rating disabilities have worsened.  The ringing in my left ear has worsened to the point the ringing is always there and loud enough to where it makes it difficult to concentrate.  My grenade concussion that caused me to lose eyesight for a short period of time back in the 90s....I believe has caused for me to have a torn retina a few years ago as the concussion may have weakened my retina.  Recently had 2 stents implanted, diabetes, shoulder pain has worsened making it harder to sleep on my sides....and on and on.  Over 20-years of active duty in Combat Arms and in combat sure does wear a body down...

So, I'm now looking to seek a higher compensation to 100% P&T.

I have previously reached out to the DAV and another organization...can't recall the name...but no forward momentum on either for assistance.  Now, I'm considering other organizations that will charge me money to help...like 360 Veteran.  Don't know of others, but I'm to a point to where I feel I should be rated at a higher rating than where I have been since 2009.

Interested in hearing from those of you who have gone to other agencies/organizations for assistance in filing VA disability claims to raise your previous rating.

Thank you all.

Edited January 9, 2022 by Top G
Updated with VA decision letter from 2009.

[Berta]

This is a fairly new TBI regulation but not the one I am trying to find- however it is important:

https://www.federalregister.gov/documents/2012/12/10/2012-29709/secondary-service-connection-for-diagnosable-illnesses-associated-with-traumatic-brain-injury

Here it is from the VA Office of the Inspector General:

https://www.va.gov/oig/pubs/VAOIG-16-04558-249.pdf

I dont think all vet reps and VSOs keep up with OIG reports.They certainly should if they really intend to help veterans.

In part it reads:
"As a consequence of the finding in Minnesota, in May 2016, VBA initiated a nationwide review
of initial TBI medical examinations and identified more than 24,000 additional veterans who
may have received initial medical examinations by someone other than one of the four
designated specialists. This led to the VA Secretary granting equitable relief to 24,842 veterans.
Equitable relief is a unique legal remedy the VA Secretary can use to correct an injustice to a
claimant, where not otherwise authorized to do so within the scope of the law.
In July 2016, VBA sent letters to affected veterans informing them of the opportunity to undergo
a new TBI medical examination and TBI disability determination, and their entitlement to
equitable relief. Veterans had one year from the date of their notification letter to contact VBA
and request a new TBI medical examination.
However, it is not clear that all eligible veterans were contacted, and some veterans were offered
equitable relief who were not eligible. This confusion was because TBI medical examination
worksheets changed over the years and they did not always differentiate between initial and
review TBI medical examinations, or they did not state examiner credentials. Therefore, VBA
and VHA could not identify all initial TBI medical examinations completed from 2007 through
2015. In order to identify veterans who had been excluded from equitable relief, VBA issued a
policy that allowed for the subsequent identification and tracking if it was discovered that a
claim for service connection for TBI did not have a proper initial TBI medical examination."

The pdf is about 37 pages long and every vet advocate should be aware of this,as it was discussed here at length many times,years ago,  and these IED situations have made it as important to new veterans in SW Asia as it is and was to veterans of SE Asia conflicts.

Maybe you were one of those veterans and maybe the VA never contacted you and should have.

Have you posted here the VA's full medical rational as to the TBI award for 10%?

And can you tell us what  diagnostic codes did they use for the TBI?

Edited January 11, 2022 by Berta
Severe weather affecting my internet access

[Top G]

9 hours ago, Berta said:

This is what I meant about the TBI fiasco years ago:

"Veterans Affairs officials aren't saying how 24,000 veterans were diagnosed with traumatic brain injury by VA physicians considered unqualified to make such a determination, but on Wednesday, told Congress the department is working to resolve related disability claims problems.

Some veterans diagnosed with TBI from 2007 to 2015 were denied disability benefits because they were examined by a VA health provider considered to be unqualified under VA policy."

https://www.militarytimes.com/veterans/2016/07/13/va-doubling-back-to-resolve-tbi-claims-denials/

You might have been one of tthe 24,000 (in my opinion it probably had been more TBI vets than that number."

The newer regulations and TBI criteria are here and I will try to find them.

 

 

My brain injury occurred back in the 90s from a 40mm HEDP round exploding from my 40 MK19 machine gun.  Blew me back and unconscious for a bit where I lost my eyesight for a short period, received small burns to my face and lost my hearing for a bit.  It is well documented in my medical record book as I also had some follow ups.  Since then, it's been documented with my bad headaches that come on where I take Zolmigtriptan for and continuation of floaters in my eyes.  Really did shake my head how my TBI was rated so low initially, but I haven't done anything about trying to get it raised ever since.

[Top G]

8 hours ago, Berta said:

Maybe you were one of those veterans and maybe the VA never contacted you and should have.

Have you posted here the VA's full medical rational as to the TBI award for 10%?

And can you tell us what  diagnostic codes did they use for the TBI?

 

Thank you!  I pulled up my letter from the VA on their findings from 2009 and have pasted the TBI portion.  Not sure if this answers your questions entirely, but can surely appreciate you help me @Berta. 

 

9 & 10. Service connection for traumatic brain injury with cognitive impairment.

Service connection for traumatic brain injury with cognitive impairment has been

established as directly related to military service.

 

Your service treatment records were reviewed. Records show that you suffered a head

injury after an unknown object hit you during June 1990. Further records during March

1992 noted that a grenade round blew-up while you were shooting it and you suffered

facial lacerations. Your exit examination indicates TBI.

 

Your QTC examinations were reviewed. A TBI examination was completed on

November 27, 2009. The examiner diagnosed TBI and indicated that your head injury

was a diffuse axonal injury and the condition has stabilized. The examiner also diagnosed

cognitive impairment and indicated that it was at least as likely as not to do with your

TBI. Further examination for your TBI condition was completed on November 30, 2009

and February 2, 2010 and the facets of your condition were examined.

 

The evaluation assigned is based upon the highest level of severity for any facet of

cognitive impairment and other residuals of traumatic brain injury (TBI) not otherwise

classified as determined on examination. Only one evaluation is assigned for all the

applicable facets. A higher evaluation is not warranted unless a higher level of severity

for a facet is established on examination. Physical and/or emotional/behavioral

disabilities found on examination that are determined to be residuals of traumatic brain

injury are evaluated separately.

 

A level of severity of "I" has been assigned for the Memory, attention, concentration,

executive functions facet, indicating that an examiner has found evidence such as a

complaint of mild loss of memory (such as having difficulty following a conversation,

recalling recent conversations, remembering names of new acquaintances, or finding

words, or often misplacing items), attention, concentration, or executive functions, but

without objective evidence on testing. A higher level of severity of "2" is not warranted

unless an examiner finds evidence such as objective evidence on testing of mild

impairment of memory, attention, concentration, or executive functions resulting in mild

functional impairment.

 

A level of severity of "0" has been assigned for the Judgment facet, indicating that an

examiner has found evidence of normal judgment. A higher level of severity of "l" is not

warranted unless an examiner finds evidence of mildly impaired judgment, including

symptoms such as for complex or unfamiliar decisions, occasionally unable to identify,

understand, and weigh the alternatives, understand the consequences of choices, and

make a reasonable decision.

 

A level of severity of "0" has been assigned for the Social interaction facet, indicating

that an examiner has found evidence that social interaction is routinely appropriate. A

higher level of severity of "1" is not warranted unless an examiner finds evidence that

social interaction is occasionally inappropriate.

 

A level of severity of"0" has been assigned for the Orientation facet, indicating that an

examiner has found evidence such as always oriented to person, time, place, and

situation. A higher level of severity of "1" is not warranted unless an examiner finds

evidence such as occasionally disoriented to one of the four aspects (person, time, place,

situation) of orientation.

 

A level of severity of "0" has been assigned for the Motor activity (with intact motor and

sensory system) facet, indicating that an examiner has found evidence of motor activity

normal. A higher level of severity of "l" is not warranted unless an examiner finds

evidence such as motor activity normal most of the time, but mildly slowed at times due

to apraxia (inability to perform previously learned motor activities, despite normal motor

function).

 

A level of severity of "0" has been assigned for the Visual spatial orientation facet,

indicating that an examiner has found evidence of normal. A higher level of severity of

"l" is not warranted unless an examiner finds evidence such as mildly impaired.

Occasionally gets lost in unfamiliar surroundings, has difficulty reading maps or

following directions. Is able to use assistive devices such as GPS (global positioning

system).

 

A level of severity of "1" has been assigned for the Subjective symptoms facet, indicating

that an examiner has found evidence of three or more subjective symptoms that mildly

interfere with work; instrumental activities of daily living; or work, family, or other close

relationships. Examples of findings that might be seen at this level of impairment are:

intermittent dizziness, daily mild to moderate headaches, tinnitus, frequent insomnia,

hypersensitivity to sound, hypersensitivity to light. A higher level of severity of "2" is not

warranted unless an examiner finds evidence of three or more subjective symptoms that

moderately interfere with work; instrumental activities of daily living; or work, family, or

other close relationships. Examples of findings that might be seen at this level of

impairment are: marked fatigability, blurred or double vision, headaches requiring rest

periods during most days.

 

A level of severity of "O" has been assigned for the Neurobehavioral effects facet,

indicating that an examiner has found evidence of one or more neurobehavioral effects

that do not interfere with workplace interaction or social interaction. Examples of

neurobehavioral effects are: irritability, impulsivity, unpredictability, lack of motivation,

verbal aggression, physical aggression, belligerence, apathy, lack of empathy, moodiness,

lack of cooperation, inflexibility, and impaired awareness of disability. Any of these

effects may range from slight to severe, although verbal and physical aggression are

likely to have a more serious impact on workplace interaction and social interaction than

some of the other effects. A higher level of severity of" 1" is not warranted unless an

examiner finds evidence of one or more neurobehavioral effects that occasionally

interfere with workplace interaction, social interaction, or both but do not preclude them.

A levelo f severityo f "0" has been assigned for the Communication facet, indicating that

an examiner has found evidence such as able to communicate by spoken and written

language ( expressive communication), and to comprehend spoken and written language.

A higher level of severity of "1" is not warranted unless an examiner finds evidence such

as comprehension or expression, or both, of either spoken language or written language is

only occasionally impaired. Can communicate complex ideas.

 

The evaluation assigned for cognitive impairment and other residuals of TBI not

otherwise classified is based upon the highest level of severity for any facet as

determined by examination. Only one evaluation is assigned for all the applicable facets.

 

NOTE: 38 CFR 4.130 Schedule of ratings pertaining to mental disorder only allows for a

single evaluation to be assigned for mental disabilities as the same criteria is used to

determine the evaluation to be assigned for these conditions.

[El Train]

File for an increase for the TBI and PTSD.  TBI exams are different nowadays.  I doubt you had the MOCA test by someone certified to administer it (neuropsychologist).  I had three TBI C&P exams and two PTSD exams when I filed for increases.  A lot of these two exams are very similar except the MOCA test.  https://www.mocatest.org/

They want to separate the PTSD symptoms from the TBI symptoms (headaches, visions, vertigo, etc.).  I scored a level three on one of the MOCA test categories.  That put me in the 70% rating.  They combined it with PTSD for 100%.  They will separate tbi conditions that don't overlap.

I had a bad PTSD C&P psyc Dr. state I didn't have TBI.  She got destroyed by the other four C&P exams.  I did file a complaint about it.  They ruled in my favor big time.

[Carl the Engineer]

Well, now, this is what I would and did do.  But, I didn't wait as long as you are.

I would file for an increase on probably all your current service connected issues.

I know less than nothing on the bent brain issues, so I will leave that to others.

But, your ratings on your shoulders, neck and knees are possibly the lowest ratings for those conditions possible, and some of those ratings have changed in recent years.  I suspect you would get an increase in all of them.  I would just tell them you think they should be rated higher as the conditions have worsened.  That is what I did and got increases in all of them.  They are all rated (anything over 10) on ROM (Range of Motion).  

I believe currently, the lowest you can get rated for a shoulder is 20%.  I claimed an increase for my left shoulder (10%) last year, by stating, the lowest rating is currenlty 20%, and they increased my rating to 20%.  Sure, I had the exam, but I don't know if that contributed to it or not as I didn't get to see the results as it was third party.

As with most of the cases I see/read on here, there is a lot of talk about Service Reps and Lawyers, etc., but you are not even close to having to be concerned about any of that.  Hell, I have the VFW, which you would be hard pressed to prove to me that they have done anything to help me in my claims.  

Simple,  just put in a claim for increase on all of your conditions and then go to the exams and wait it out.  I did and I went from 30 to 40 to 60 to 70 to 80 to 90 and then to 100P&T.

Put in the claim,

Hamslice

Otherwise, you are wasting time.  The VA ain't going to do it for you!

Edited January 11, 2022 by Hamslice
cause I can

[Top G]

9 hours ago, Berta said:

"When did concurrent receipt start?
CRDP was first authorized in the FY2004 NDAA and was phased in over a 10-year period between 2004-2013. CRDP is sometimes referred to as restored retired pay, as it removes the previously required offset of VA payments.Aug 11, 2020"

https://crsreports.congress.gov/product/pdf/IF/IF10594

It seems you were eligible for CRDP during the time frame of your claim.***

CRDP is automatic.

Thank you....I just got off the phone with the VA and they informed me that it doesn't make since for me to apply for CRSC.  I'm a 20-year active duty retired Marine rated at 90%.  So, I'm received my 90% disability concurrently with my full retirement pay.  From what I gathered on the phone call with the VA, CRSC is for disabled veterans receiving less than 50% disability.