Jump to content
  • 0

Timeline


FlyboyLeRoy

Question

Submitted a bva direct review on 1-11-22. Disability was reduced (100 to 80) after a lesser level of care provider (pa) had a conflicting DBQ than my actual doctor who is a specialist in that field (ears). I see average time is 365 days,  which is near. I’m also on a hardship claim. My question is should it come to an end here in the next 2 months or what have you heard/|seen with claims like mine.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Answers 8
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters For This Question

Popular Days

Top Posters For This Question

8 answers to this question

Recommended Posts

  • 0
  • HadIt.com Elder

That number of days is fluid, not fixed, and is an estimate only. It changes as workload changes amongst the ROs .  0995s and 0996s are also different. Since one allows submission of new evidence (0995) they can take longer. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 0

In no way should you believe the hype, those numbers really do not exist. As far as I know the 365 days were for Direct Review Appeals at the BVA and most veterans are well in the numbers of 400+++ days and counting and there seems to be no light at the end of the tunnel and some veterans are 500+++ days and counting.

As for filing a Supplemental or an HRL which the VA says those would be completed faster around 125 days, those days are also skewed and there is no real time limit there also in which those days are taken closer to the 365 days but if your disagreement is denied the veteran then has to file an appeal to the BVA in which his/her timeframe/timeline starts all over.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 0
  • Moderator

You posted "that you were reduced".  Did you receive a "proposed reduction" to give you 60 days to request a hearing?  

If not, Va is in violation and you should appeal the reduction.  You probably should appeal it anyway, Unless you have "actually improved under ordinary conditions of life".  To appeal simply file a NOD.  Here is the criteria for reductions, see for your self if you meet this criteria. (likely not):

    In your appeal argue that you dont meet the criteria below, for reduction:

§ 3.344 Stabilization of disability evaluations.

(a) Examination reports indicating improvement. Rating agencies will handle cases affected by change of medical findings or diagnosis, so as to produce the greatest degree of stability of disability evaluations consistent with the laws and Department of Veterans Affairs regulations governing disability compensation and pension. It is essential that the entire record of examinations and the medical-industrial history be reviewed to ascertain whether the recent examination is full and complete, including all special examinations indicated as a result of general examination and the entire case history. This applies to treatment of intercurrent diseases and exacerbations, including hospital reports, bedside examinations, examinations by designated physicians, and examinations in the absence of, or without taking full advantage of, laboratory facilities and the cooperation of specialists in related lines. Examinations less full and complete than those on which payments were authorized or continued will not be used as a basis of reduction. Ratings on account of diseases subject to temporary or episodic improvement, e.g., manic depressive or other psychotic reaction, epilepsy, psychoneurotic reaction, arteriosclerotic heart disease, bronchial asthma, gastric or duodenal ulcer, many skin diseases, etc., will not be reduced on any one examination, except in those instances where all the evidence of record clearly warrants the conclusion that sustained improvement has been demonstrated. Ratings on account of diseases which become comparatively symptom free (findings absent) after prolonged rest, e.g. residuals of phlebitis, arteriosclerotic heart disease, etc., will not be reduced on examinations reflecting the results of bed rest. Moreover, though material improvement in the physical or mental condition is clearly reflected the rating agency will consider whether the evidence makes it reasonably certain that the improvement will be maintained under the ordinary conditions of life. When syphilis of the central nervous system or alcoholic deterioration is diagnosed following a long prior history of psychosis, psychoneurosis, epilepsy, or the like, it is rarely possible to exclude persistence, in masked form, of the preceding innocently acquired manifestations. Rating boards encountering a change of diagnosis will exercise caution in the determination as to whether a change in diagnosis represents no more than a progression of an earlier diagnosis, an error in prior diagnosis or possibly a disease entity independent of the service-connected disability. When the new diagnosis reflects mental deficiency or personality disorder only, the possibility of only temporary remission of a super-imposed psychiatric disease will be borne in mind.

(b) Doubtful cases. If doubt remains, after according due consideration to all the evidence developed by the several items discussed in paragraph (a) of this section, the rating agency will continue the rating in effect, citing the former diagnosis with the new diagnosis in parentheses, and following the appropriate code there will be added the reference “Rating continued pending reexamination ______ months from this date, § 3.344.” The rating agency will determine on the basis of the facts in each individual case whether 18, 24 or 30 months will be allowed to elapse before the reexamination will be made.

(c) Disabilities which are likely to improve. The provisions of paragraphs (a) and (b) of this section apply to ratings which have continued for long periods at the same level (5 years or more). They do not apply to disabilities which have not become stabilized and are likely to improve. Reexaminations disclosing improvement, physical or mental, in these disabilities will warrant reduction in rating.

[26 FR 1586, Feb. 24, 1961; 58 FR 53660, Oct. 18, 1993]
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 0

 

Great info broncovet (as always)

you said "I’m also on a hardship claim."  Hardship claims gets different handling. (If approved)  I have had the same issue where they were dragging there feet on a hardship claim. I called the Whitehouse Hot Line 1-800-698-2411. They responded in about 2 weeks and had it fixed in 3 week because of the Hardship. Having said that it may take more time this time of year..

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 0

Well what I found to be interesting is say a veteran has a bva remand to regional office.

Say the regional granted 3 month retro.

If you disagree they will make you do a new nod and will not return it back to the board.

The regional will take the new nod and start a new appeal stream. 

You will now be at the end of the line with a new docket number and if you had a hardship on the claim.

You will have to do a new one.

I had a 2018 appeal date it is now a 2021 appeal and I had to reapply for hardship to get it return to the board.

Or I would of waited years to get the appeal address again.

Keep a eye on your docket numbers this is how veterans are get the wrong effective date. After years of appeal.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 0
3 hours ago, Mr cue said:

funny part is docket numbers far after mine are already complete. 

Keep a eye on your docket numbers this is how veterans are get the wrong effective date. After years of appeal.

f

4 hours ago, Rattler767 said:

I. will contact that number, too. Thank you. I have been approved for hardship claim about 5 months ago. docket numbers after mine have been completed. 

Great info broncovet (as always)

you said "I’m also on a hardship claim."  Hardship claims gets different handling. (If approved)  I have had the same issue where they were dragging there feet on a hardship claim. I called the Whitehouse Hot Line 1-800-698-2411. They responded in about 2 weeks and had it fixed in 3 week because of the Hardship. Having said that it may take more time this time of year..

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 0
7 hours ago, broncovet said:

 

i filed for an increase from 70%. submitted all needed paperwork, by law, from my doctor, which granted me the 100%. After c&p exam they took my 100% back and gave me 70% again. The c&p from a PA stated the problem was rectified, so his conflicting paperwork to priority over all of my doctors, who is a specialist, and reduced me back to 70. So, retrospectively, when i received my decision, they explain all of this and i found out i was given 100 for. amonth, lost it from c&p date. and now almost a year waiting for direct review. THey broke several of their own laws when they took probative value, and callled me in for a c&p exam when i was already service connected for it and met all requirements per cfr. 

You posted "that you were reduced".  Did you receive a "proposed reduction" to give you 60 days to request a hearing?  

If not, Va is in violation and you should appeal the reduction.  You probably should appeal it anyway, Unless you have "actually improved under ordinary conditions of life".  To appeal simply file a NOD.  Here is the criteria for reductions, see for your self if you meet this criteria. (likely not):

    In your appeal argue that you dont meet the criteria below, for reduction:

§ 3.344 Stabilization of disability evaluations.

(a) Examination reports indicating improvement. Rating agencies will handle cases affected by change of medical findings or diagnosis, so as to produce the greatest degree of stability of disability evaluations consistent with the laws and Department of Veterans Affairs regulations governing disability compensation and pension. It is essential that the entire record of examinations and the medical-industrial history be reviewed to ascertain whether the recent examination is full and complete, including all special examinations indicated as a result of general examination and the entire case history. This applies to treatment of intercurrent diseases and exacerbations, including hospital reports, bedside examinations, examinations by designated physicians, and examinations in the absence of, or without taking full advantage of, laboratory facilities and the cooperation of specialists in related lines. Examinations less full and complete than those on which payments were authorized or continued will not be used as a basis of reduction. Ratings on account of diseases subject to temporary or episodic improvement, e.g., manic depressive or other psychotic reaction, epilepsy, psychoneurotic reaction, arteriosclerotic heart disease, bronchial asthma, gastric or duodenal ulcer, many skin diseases, etc., will not be reduced on any one examination, except in those instances where all the evidence of record clearly warrants the conclusion that sustained improvement has been demonstrated. Ratings on account of diseases which become comparatively symptom free (findings absent) after prolonged rest, e.g. residuals of phlebitis, arteriosclerotic heart disease, etc., will not be reduced on examinations reflecting the results of bed rest. Moreover, though material improvement in the physical or mental condition is clearly reflected the rating agency will consider whether the evidence makes it reasonably certain that the improvement will be maintained under the ordinary conditions of life. When syphilis of the central nervous system or alcoholic deterioration is diagnosed following a long prior history of psychosis, psychoneurosis, epilepsy, or the like, it is rarely possible to exclude persistence, in masked form, of the preceding innocently acquired manifestations. Rating boards encountering a change of diagnosis will exercise caution in the determination as to whether a change in diagnosis represents no more than a progression of an earlier diagnosis, an error in prior diagnosis or possibly a disease entity independent of the service-connected disability. When the new diagnosis reflects mental deficiency or personality disorder only, the possibility of only temporary remission of a super-imposed psychiatric disease will be borne in mind.

(b) Doubtful cases. If doubt remains, after according due consideration to all the evidence developed by the several items discussed in paragraph (a) of this section, the rating agency will continue the rating in effect, citing the former diagnosis with the new diagnosis in parentheses, and following the appropriate code there will be added the reference “Rating continued pending reexamination ______ months from this date, § 3.344.” The rating agency will determine on the basis of the facts in each individual case whether 18, 24 or 30 months will be allowed to elapse before the reexamination will be made.

(c) Disabilities which are likely to improve. The provisions of paragraphs (a) and (b) of this section apply to ratings which have continued for long periods at the same level (5 years or more). They do not apply to disabilities which have not become stabilized and are likely to improve. Reexaminations disclosing improvement, physical or mental, in these disabilities will warrant reduction in rating.

[26 FR 1586, Feb. 24, 1961; 58 FR 53660, Oct. 18, 1993]

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 0
19 minutes ago, FlyboyLeRoy said:

f

 

Do the hot line its open 24x7.  Pay no atten to the numbers on the VA's web site they are never right..

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Answer this question...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.



×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

{terms] and Guidelines