I think waiting on a decision letter might be worst than the process

[Mr cue]

Man this sit around waiting on a letter is mess with me I ain't call in two days.

I feel I am upset my self for nothing then ppl ain't going to say anything.

I keep looking on ebenfits trying to figure out what they granted. Smh.

I can't get happy because last time the judge switch one month of smc s to smc l.

I got 300.00 retro lol.

I keep try to break it down there was only two issue left under the cavc remand docket.

Smc o and r and loss of use under smc benfits smc m.

Now they remand the loss of use for six months they comp exam shopp it I refuse there exam.

I already had a favorable  specialized loss of use comp exam done by the VA.

Anyway the soc on address this.

Not the smc o and r remand by the court.

So my thought is it the smc r or o.

 Lol.

All this in my head when they could of just put the letter for the smc.

Ok I done venting again lol

 

 

 

 

[Rivet62]

6 minutes ago, Mr cue said:

Next it was your tdiu is based off all your conditions.smh

This sounds like the rationale behind extraschedular, in a way. If extraschedular is possible for TDIU at an RO director's discretion, then why is the bar so high for SMCs??

All your conditions is why you are seeking appropriate SMCs. Instead, they are saying that you must have a strict high rating of 60% for one condition over the 100% TDIU that you're currently rated for? Makes no sense what they're doing.  You are seeking appropriate SMCs because all your conditions make you substantially confined to the home, in the same way that TDIU is granted when the schedular requirements are not met.

9 minutes ago, Mr cue said:

Because the meaning of the term “substantially confined” is ambiguous and there is no regulatory interpretation, “the Court must determine the meaning” of the term “and the Board’s obligation” thereunder. Thompson v. Brown, 8 Vet.App. 169, 175 (1995); see also Jackson and Cropper, both supra. The Secretary submits that the clear implication of this term is that the requirement that one be “substantially confined” is met when the
claimant is restricted to his house except for medical treatment purposes. The Secretary, citing to Senate Report No. 1745 (June 27, 1960), notes that in passing section 1114(s) Congress intended to provide additional compensation for veterans who were unable to overcome their particular disabilities and leave the house in order to earn an income as opposed to an inability to leave the house at all.

I can't believe you have to fight so hard for what amounts to simple help.

[john999]

Bradley V Peake is the decision that granted some TDIU vets "S".  I had TDIU plus 60% and the VA did not immediately grant me "S".  I had to claim it.  Pissed me off!

[Berta]

I just re read your CAVC remand and noticed something-

"Finally, to the extent that Mr.  appears to argue that VA has refused to accept an 
NOD or otherwise process a claim for vocational rehabilitation and employment (VR&E) benefits, 
see Appellant's Informal Br. at 10-11, 14, the Secretary is correct that the January 2020 Boarddecision on appeal did not address any VR&E issues."

Did you ever formally apply for VR&E and did the VA turn you down ,solely due to your established SC conditions, prior to 2018?

It might not matter if they did- maybe others will comment on that-it is here:

https://community.hadit.com/topic/83325-cavc-decision/

[Berta]

I hope you realize Mr CUE that all of us want you to succeed.

My interpretation of Howell, is explained somewhere here and also I gave Ken Carpenter my rationale for my opinion on that...

Although your case  is still on remand and being worked on ,as far as I can tell, by the VARO-

did you actually file a recent formal  CUE on the HB matter?

If so what VA entity did you file it on? BVA? or the Buffalo VARO?

[Mr cue]

 

5 hours ago, Berta said:

Finally, to the extent that Mr.  appears to argue that VA has refused to accept an 
NOD or otherwise process a claim for vocational rehabilitation and employment (VR&E) benefits, 
see Appellant's Informal Br. at 10-11, 14, the Secretary is correct that the January 2020 Boarddecision on appeal did not address any VR&E issues.

This is a whole different issue.

Little back story might help some understand what the independent living program is.

I was accepted in the independent living program ch 31 program.

4 years before I was granted smc l need of help of other or apply.

Well the VA will never address my independent living records for a earlier effective date for smc l or talk about them.

The reason why is that I did a administrative review of my independent living program 2015-16

Because the buffalo ny v@re would not even purchase item or give me denied of the items I ask for.

Basically they did want to purchase anything just give me hospital items.

Not how it work

 Washington told them to purchase all these items after I did a administrative review to DC v@re.

On the denail of  items.

Well the buffalo ny v@re closed the case didn't purchase anything after DC told them to.

I did 5 different nod the supviser will not put them in the system

Ever time I do one they send to her an she will not process it.

V@re is a whole different beast.

I understand the program well.

That how I understand that just because a the v@re say no to something.

Have them put it in writing not just stated it verbally.

You can't appeal a verbally denied. Smh.

There trick. Anyway.

I am not fight that right now but I am fighting why the VA will not give a reason and base.

Why my effective date isn't when the VA understood and v@re understood I need help of other.

Smc is granted by the record and effective by the record.

 

The date the v@ re accepted me in there program is 4 5 years before I apply for smc l.

 

They are try to never bring it up or address it because the court will see that I ask for help. 5 years ago.

An DC told the program to get me a bed computer in home cooking class. Ergo chair and desk etc.

I ask for the massage chair do to my condition DC. Granted it .

All this other stuff and it get back.

 I ask buffalo why they are not including my hobbies or interest.in my plan. They loss it.

This is were you get camera equipment etc 

Anything that you feel is your interest or hobbies.

The VA doesn't want to address the interest and hobbies part of the program anymore.

Since the guy won that the VA had to build him a greenhouse.

That was his hobbies and interests.

And he took it to the court and they order VA to build it for him.

This program has 25,000 for each veteran.

They don't want to use any or less as they can.

That why they offer nothing but VA hospital items at first.

I just left it alone while I fight this battle. For smc and my effective dates of it

But I got them at anytime

because I uploaded a nod before she could close my program. Back in 2017.

She can't stop a upload

it go right in your record. She just chose not to start the process.

So it sit in appeal status.

An I see it in my record

I don't even think she understand that. 

I think she feel like she closed my program with out purchasing anything DC told her to and got away with it.

I apply for smc benfits 2018.

The court set aside the effective dates granted.

That the court case you are reading

The VA will not address a time period before I apply.

It was remand back to them and they still will not address any evidence from my record before I apply for smc benfits.

I am back at the court with 4 different decision from that court remand you read.

So now that one cavc remand. You read.

Is now 3 different appeals now at the Court.

 

It's a lot that why I fight it not everybody understand what the VA is doing in my case.

I do because I am the one who. Did All this.

 

 

 

[Mr cue]

Last part the DC told the independent living program to equip my car and get me a scooter.

They did purchase anything.

The VA does want to address this or my loss of use.

Automobile granted is at issue.

I am fight big stuff