C&P BS

[Dustoff1970]

Here is more C&P BS put out by another admin at another forum location (not this one)

"You do realize that a NP is more than capable of completing a C&P exam right? This isn't someone treating you for some rare condition. Any bachelors of nursing student in their final year could likely read your medical records and do a c&p exam."

This is the very reason why the many many BVA appeal decisions rule against a VARO rater claim denial because the BVA finds the C&P examiner's negative exam opinion against the vet to be defective or inadequate and in many decisions such as my two recent appeals the BVA compares the VA examiner's credential or lack of to the private doctor's favorable opinion and his many years of medical expertise experience to include professional qualifications such as surgeon or specialist.

Often even without a doctor's MO supporting the vet the BVA will still rule against the examiner's negative opinion when weighing the other positive medical evidence in the record for the vet against the dufus examiner's non qualified judgement negative opinion.  The whole ****** system is corrupt as hell at the initial VARO decision level.

These VA and contractor C&P examiners do a h*** of a lot more than review medical records as the inexperience booboos make critical judgement calls as to whether or not the veteran's disability is related to military service or another service connected medical issue and gives excuse for VARO rater denial of the initial claim.

Please seek advice from experienced members of this forum before listening too another

My comment is not legal advice as I am not a lawyer, paralegal or VSO

[Vync]

21 minutes ago, pacmanx1 said:

I can recall the Regional Offices used to have amnesties days for employees to return lost or missing veterans records and evidence. It goes a lot deeper, and a lot of veterans never really hear/know about the real horror stories. 

I guess that happened when I initially filed in 1995. My VSO submitted a claim and included a copy of my service folder and STRs. A couple of months later, I received a decision letter denying my claim because my claims folder was empty and they stated not having received copies of either. It was definitely a duty to assist failure, but after filing a NOD, two months later they came back and said they miraculously found them... Of course, that was also back when the claims folders would be left unsecured on top/under desks or in carts in the hall...

[pacmanx1]

The ROs still do what they want when they want. I recently had two separate LHI C & P exams that were very favorable, but the RO ignored their own medical opinion and medical rationale. I was recently granted a new separate appeal after the RO chose not to accept their medical examiner’s opinion. What’s the point of sending a veteran to a medical examination then turn around and just ignore their opinion? What a bunch of Sugar Honey Iced Tea. Even when the examiners do the right thing the RO goes and tries to screw the veteran out of his/her benefits.

[Carl the Engineer]

Well, to add to the argument, the Veteran has a hard time or delayed time to try and get copies of third party exams.  So, not only are the exams not good enough for the VA, the Veteran can't get their hands on the exams in a timely matter for appeals, etc.

As an example, I won my claim for 100% P&T in June of last year.  They also denied part of the claim.  I want to appeal.  But, they, the VA, opened two claims, one for concurrent receipt, and one for a recupment.  So, I had a hearing on the recupment and won, but that took time. 

So, I want a copy of my c-file to see what, I thought was a favorable LHI exam, was, and why they sent it to California for a Doctor to knock that opinion down. 

So, I requested my c-file after all the smoke cleared from the two VA initiated claims, too make sure everything would be in the file.  That was in February.  Everything takes time with the VA.  My one year is up in June.

So without a game plan, and no time to do a lot of research on my denial, I will probably due the HLR, just to buy time, until I can see my c-file.  Then go from there after the HLR.

Yes, some Veterans call it "Doctor Shopping", but I'm not sure, but the VA does send them to another doctor to get a different answer.  Their excuse is that the exam was "inadequate".  If that's the case, send me back to that same NP/Examiner and get them to do it right, and only pay them once.  Why are we (tax payers) paying for multiple "inadequate" exams.

But then again, the VA sends 6 million letters out to Veterans saying the mail is slow.  Could have just put my c-file in that letter and saved some money.  

Carl

 

[Dustoff1970]

Since 1985 my one favorable and very important to me VA C&P exam was not performed by a light weight PA or NP but a true VA MD who was chief of his medical department.  His 1998 or 99 written opinion was 6 pages in small type with detailed explanation of his diagnosis, medical history, Vietnam service and his opinion everything was caused by my Army Vietnam service and his statement of no future improvement (prognosis).

Then in those days only true MD doctors both VA and contractor performed C&P exams at VA hospitals and clinics.  The contract doctors wore white coats with words VA sewn on the pocket and of course a stethoscope around their necks. No chicken chit DBQs were used then either. Those were the days

My comment is not legal advice as I am not a lawyer, paralegal or VSO so do not contact me for more info.

 

 

 

Edited April 23, 2022 by Dustoff 11

[Vync]

@Carl Bacon

The VA is supposed to be nonadversarial, but the veil preventing access to our records is clearly adversarial.
  It took way too long to get my c-file on disc. I was in the process of submitting an FTCA and the deadline was approaching. I ended up being called by someone from the St. Louis VARO and we talked for a bit. Because I am a programmer, I inquired about online access like myhealthevet. It was "in the works", which is the response I expected. I did get the disc less than a week later, however that was more than a month after the FTCA deadline. When I submitted the claim, I stated that the VA failed to provide the c-file in a timely fashion.0

The single PDF file contained more than 11,000 pages which were often out of order and poorly organized. Fortunately, it had bookmarks, but the way they are labeled is not much help. They are labeled with what appears to be a sequence number, document title (sometimes prefixed with VA form ID), date, and then a GUID (which is typically an alphanumeric ID which should be unique, but great for referencing an exact document in question). No personal information is in this screenshot.

The document was redacted despite requesting it not to be redacted. Most of the redactions were extremely sloppy, often overlapping relevant information. However, in some cases content that should have been redacted was not redacted at all. 

A large part of what I was looking for was relating to bad C&P exams after my heart attack. The VA did provide me some information related to that, but after I got the c-file I learned that they missed a few very relevant pages.

 

 

[Vync]

@Dustoff 11
At least they typed it, which can be a very huge plus. I have a CUE at the BVA for errors in a 20+ year old decision. C&P was handwritten and the MD wrote out numerical ROM-related information in cursive instead of representing it with actual numbers, much in the way you would write out numerical notation a check. The VARO staff claimed it was "not objective" measurements.

Back in that timeframe, they used "C&P Examination Worksheets" which were later converted to DBQs. Many of my exams consisted solely of typed answers from where they entered them into the computer. The answers were labeled like an outline. Each section was broken out into letters and numbers, but the question was not present. I sent the FOIA so I could learn which questions were being answered. Because this was an ROM claim, they were required  to include details about functional ROM loss per DeLuca. The answers were clear indicated that functional loss was present, but the VA decision maker used the higher max ROM value instead of the lower function loss ROM which would have yielded a 10% higher rating. Eventually, I did receive a letter from the VA saying that they were not able to locate a copy of the examination worksheet form which contained the questions. When I requested HLR review, I happen to have located a copy of that form in my original c-file box from 10 years ago and included it. I put together a blog article here which describes them further.