(CAVC|BVA) Remands & (10) year rule in effect.

[Oakley]

I've been mediclally retired since June 27,2012 with the same disabilities I have today been 100℅ unemployable P&T AND THEN 100℅ Schedular from :(June 27,2012) and "housebound in fact,"  which is the SMC (S-2), from    (June 27,2012).

 

So the (10) year rule is in effect, if that even means anything, the VA will do what the hell it wants and break every rule on the way as they laugh about it,let's face it. 

 

So I couldn't get anything successful on my claims at my local VARO they just deny,deny,deny without even considering the evidence in front of them. So I appealed to the BVA which after a year granted everything (8) different contentions ALL  "GRANTED,"                      NO  "REMANDS, I was very excited about this, but the only concern was  the effective dates were way off, by years!

 

So, I filed with the court of veterans appeals or CAVC, about correcting the effective dates and the judge at CAVC agreed with me and ordered that it be "remanded," back to the BVA to correct the "Effective Dates," that are more consistent with his decision.

 

So here we are, the LOCAL VARO, denies everything I've asked to be awarded, several times over, I then send in the same disabilities, with same amount of evidence, that my local VARO had this whole time, and the "Judge" at  the "BVA grants" everything,  and the BVA judge also finds a "CUE,"  on the local VARO for not awarding me or even considering the  SMC (S-2) with effective date : (June 27,2012). Then the judge at CAVC agrees that the effective dates need to be corrected and order it remanded back to the BVA to correct this to be more consistent with this decision.

 

So the next part is where In have some issues with BVA GRANTS ME EVERYTHING THAT LOCAL VARO DENIED, THE CAVC JUDGE AGREES THE DECISION IS CORRECT BY THE BVA FOR AWARDING ME BUT MUST BE REMANDED BACK TO BVA TO CORRECT THE EFFECTIVE DATES, THEN ONCE THE BVA GETS THE REMAND, THE BVA JUDGE, NOT THR SAME JUDGE WHO MADE THE ORIGINAL GRANT OF ALL MY CONTENTIONS,  BUT A DIFFERENT BVA JUDGE, THIS WAS  (2) WEEKS AGO BY THE WAY WHEN IT WAS COMPLETED,  DOESN'T EVEN MENTION MUCH ABOUT CORRECTING THE EFFECTIVE DATES, WHICH WAS THE WHOLE  REASON FOR WHY THE  CAVC JUDGE REMANDED, IN THE FIRST PLACE, BUT THE BVA JUDGE WANTS ME TO GO THRU ALL THE EXAMS AGAIN FOR AID AND ATTENDANCE, AS HE DOESNT LIKE THE NOTES OR RESULTS FROM MY MEDICAL RECORDS?? 

 

SO THE BVA JUDGE THEN "REMANDS A REMAND,"  ALL THE WAY BACK TO THE VARO, TO CORRECT THIS, BUT KEEP IN MIND, THIS ALREADY AFTER A BVA JUDGE GRANTED EVERYTHING WITH THE EVIDENCE IN FRONT OF HIM, THEN A CAVC JUDGE, AGREES WITH THE BVA AWARD, BUT REMAND BACK TO THE BVA TO CORRECT THE EFFECTIVE DATES, THEN THE BVA JUDGE ON REMAND DOESNT MENTION MUCH ABOUT CORRECTING THE EFFECTIVE DATES, WHICH WAS THE WHOLE REASON FOR THE REMAND BY CAVC IN THE FIRST PLACE, BUT THEN BVA JUDGE REMANDS, IT BACK LOCAL VARO, TO HAVE ME RETAKE ALL THE EXAMS "AGAIN"  ON A DECISION THAT A JUDGE AT THE BVA ORIGINALLY GRANTED AND A CAVC JUDGE AGREED THAT THE DECISION WAS CORRECT BUT TO CORRECT THE EFFECTIVE DATES.

 

So as of right now the local VARO has the remand/appeal from the BVA.

  So is this legal? 

 

Whats your thoughts on this?

 

"(10) -year rule in Effect"

 

Thanks!

 

 

 

[pacmanx1]

Send me a PM and I will show you what I see without it never being redacted and yes, the number is still there today.

[Rattler]

I went in and redacted the files an reposted them. Thanks.

[pacmanx1]

I also deleted part of my PM to be safe.