Submitted the NOD and was granted secondary service connection

[Treymon]

Hey and Howdy, I submitted the NOD and just received back a letter from VBA stating that the appeal for my left foot neuroma is being granted secondarily to service connection injuries.

I did not receive a statement of case, date of claim or percentage granted. The e-benefits web site says the date of claim was in 2005 but no exact date. 

The letter goes on to say that the VBA will be getting in touch with me in a couple of months or so.

Is this standard operating procedure not to relay date of claim or percentage granted?

Thank You,

T. Lawler, E-5, medically retired

 

[Berta]

Have you had a C & P exam yet? Or did they have enough recent medical evidence to award without a C & P ? They apparently dont have a rating determined yet.

I thought VA.gov vet access site replaced ebenefits-

For some reason that letter seems unusual to me-

The letter came from the VBA but not the Regional Office?

Was this a remand from the BVA?

Can you scan and attach that letter here- cover your C fie number, name, address, prior to scanning it.

I hope it sets you up for SMC but can't tell yet.

 

 

[Berta]

I found one of your past posts here- What a LOT of BS you were given by some lazy assed vet reps! Join the Crowd!

It is sickening to see what some of these well paid Reps and VSOs try to pull on vets. I bet many of them, like some of  the RO claims people , are illiterate.

I am assuming this was a BVA remand- that  a VARO is finally working on.

Can you give us the Citation Number and Docket Number of the Remand?

It will be public at the BVA web site- but no names etc. 

Is your 100% SC fully established by now ?

Left foot neuroma- does this involve a seconday to a SC foot condition,such as pes planus etc etc, if so is it Morton's neuroma? They might only award 10%- do you have other issues at the RO pending their decisions?

Did the neuroma involve any surgery?

 

 

[broncovet]

Congratulations on your award!

This sounds like a BVA decision, which, as Berta pointed out, could be a remand.  Even if it was a full grant of benefits, the board likely leaves the effective date discretion up to the VARO.   For me, time after time, the board takes ONE decision, cuts it up into 3 pieces, sometimes dragging it out 10 or more years.  First, is SC.

Next is disability percentage, and last is effective date.  

Unfortuanately, this is Standard procedure for what they sometimes call it "to the VARO in the first instance".  

You see, the only way the BVA has jurisdition over your appeal, is if/when you give it to them, when you file a NOD and appeal to the BVA.  That gives them jurisdiction.  

Many Vets sign and send in a "waiver of VARO consideration", and this suggests, the board can proceed and decide additional issues, such as an effective date or disability percentage "in the first instance".  

I understand the waiver is no longer required, and I think this means its up to the board to decide issues "in the first instance", that is, without first offering the VARO a chance to decide it.  

I have seen board decisions decide, say a disability percentage, and effective date, in the first instance, by saying things like "the effective date is June, 22, "but no earlier".  

Its possible, or even likely the board can not make an effective date decision "because" there may well be additional evidence that went into your file "after your claim was certified" but before it was decided by the board, that could have an effect of the effective date.  A doc may have made an opinion as to "when" your disabilty first began.  Remember the effective date is the later of the date of claim, or when disability first began (facts found).  

Often, in C and p exams, the doctor may well give you a favorable medical opinion, but he does not give a date as to when the disabilty began.  So, the VARO typically uses the date of the C and P exam, which is "almost always" wrong.   You see, an effective date "the date of the C and P exam" suggests you went to the C and P exam, and you had no disabilities, but, when you came out of the examiners office, you were "poof" disabled.  The c and p exam dis not "cause" your disabiities, and the examiner did not disable you.  You already had that maladay long before you went to that exam..That is why the c and p exam date is never correct.  

(I hate it when VA does this).  In your case, perhaps the doc did not opine a "date your disability began", so the board remanded it to the VARO so that date can be determined, with an additional c and p exam, if necessary.  

The VA rarely, if ever, guesses.  They require documentation of everything.  This includes "the date your condition began".  

It seems to make sense to me, you apply on April 2, 2008, the VA delays and delays, you finaly get a c and p exam in 2022, but the doc does not give a "date disabilty began".   so filling in the blanks, you already had this disability (facts found) in 2008, so that should be the effective date.  NO>.  The VA presumes your disabiity began on the date of the c and p exam, not when you applied, and this procedure hornswaggles you out of more than a decade of retro (from 2008, to the date of the c and p exam).  

    I have never had the VARO get the effective date correct, yet.  They always get it wrong, and I have to appeal or "settle" for less than I deserve.  I usually appeal.  

    This is a long answer, summed up by "you just have to wait for the VARO decision envelope, there are few shortcuts.  

     You can sometimes get many more details, by looking at your vBMS file, or you can check the letters section of ebenefits.  "IF" your effective date has been established, but you have not yet been notified, then you can sometimes find it there.  

     Wait for the envelope.  I cant recall where I read it, but VARO is "way behind" implementing board decisions, (due to covid). so you could have to wait several more months.  

    

 

[Berta]

"I understand the waiver is no longer required,"

In Feb 2022 they sent a friend of mine the waiver form-???

They made an award a few weeks ago at the RO but he is going to appeal some denials and has chosen to go to the BVA again, because the BVA can READ!

I agreed with him bcause we deal with the same VARO Buffalo NY.

I was going to help him CUE the decision because the RO did not follow the remand,but I think he will do much better at the BVA. again- it is the only VA entity that has ever really read his evidence.

 

[broncovet]

I agree, Berta, its rather unclear if the waiver of regional office consideration is required or not.  The safest way, is to sign it and send it in if you want to save time and have the board decide in the first instance.  

This decision (1997) discussed a waiver:

https://www.va.gov/vetapp97/files5/9740655.txt

However, with AMA, a "certification to the Board", also mentioned in the above decision, is no longer required after Feb. 2019.  

This 15 page document also discusses the waiver in some detail, but again, its from 1997, and there have been changes:

https://www.va.gov/vetapp97/files5/9740655.txt

According to this BVA site, the waiver is required, else, your claim will be remanded for consideration by the VARO in the first instance.

https://www.bva.va.gov/Frequently_Asked_questions.asp

I cant imagine a Veteran, who was awarded benefits BY THE BOARD, who would appeal whining this should have been remanded to the VARO first.  

But, if the board considered it and then denied, I could see the Vet appealing to the CAVC arguing he deserves VARO consideration. 

Like many other VA laws, they are often applied "unequally" throughout the VA.  

While I did read something earlier that the waiver was no longer required, I cant find it, and the safest thing is to sign and send in the waiver, if, indeed, that is what you want.  

Its way different than it was in 1997, when our claims were on paper.  Now, a doctor can do an exam, and this can become part of the file very soon..it no longer takes decades for this exam to become part of the file. 

Remember, they used to require SSOC's when the VEt submits new evidence while his or her appeal is waiting before the board.  Previously, it often meant a very long time where new evidence was not presented to the board..sometimes decades.  

However, with VBMS, the board should have nearly "real time" access to the Veterans medical records, and they should be able to simply consider this new evidence.  

The old "certification" to the board supposedly "locked" the file, and it was decided on the evidence contained in the certification.  Now that there is no longer a certification (except legacy claims/appeals), with AMA, this seems to be much less of an issue.  

Again, tho, the safest way is to send in the waiver and sign it.  I did.  Or, you could be put on a hamster wheel of remands for a very long time.