QTC

[prietosky]

Today i went to my QTC Exam for allergic rhinitis,doc very profecional,once he done told me,he will do everything to VA give me 50%,which rise me to 100% rating,my question is,can i trust what he said???

[brokensoldier244th]

The doctors report, the raters decide. There is nowhere on the form for him to suggest a percentage, and they aren’t trained for that. Their job is to document symptoms and history.

 

Do we read reports where they try? Sure, but I and the raters have the whole record available to us, too, and we’re more familiar with going through them every day. We can’t make medical judgements but we can tell when an examiner or IMO is bullshitting us.
 

Especially the run and gun types that will write most anything if you pay them- they tend to pad they medical reports with more legalese than symptoms which usually screws you. Had they put that level of detail into the diagnosis there are veterans that would have been granted the first time out. 

[broncovet]

Well, you met him, we did not, so you have a better feel for him than we do.    However, I cant tell you how many times a c and p examiner's "spoken word" was vastly different from the  actual  exam report.  Some are just afraid to tell you the truth, because you may well get mad...or even violent.  

All the above said, there are, of course honest people, including c and p examiners.  At least one of my c and p examiner's was not only honest, but also exceptionally helpful in providing a nexus and applicable evidence which was a huge help.  

Another examiner "sounded great", but when I got the report, she made it sound like I was Bernie Madoff, trying to rip off billions from the government.  

That exceptionally negative exam concerned me for a while, but I spoke with another Vet who also had a very negative exam report.  He said the examiner accused him of..what's the term...malingering?   

With each and every claim, its almost never clear cut all one way or the other.  Instead, the BVA often uses the term "balance of evidence for the claim, and against the claim".  That is actually a good thing, because, the Board has to give the veteran the benefit of the doubt, and award the claim, if the claim is "in equipoise".  

Indeed, the Board must give a reasons and bases as to "why" they rejected a favorable exam or evidence.  One example may be something like, 

"While the exam dated 11-13-1998, was favorable, this exam was less thorough than the exam dated 11-18-2020, with the 2020 examiner providing x ray evidence there is no long term joint injury..blah, blah, blah..therefore, the claim is denied, as the most recent exam was much more thorough."...something like that.

    If the BVA "does not" explain why a favorable exam was rejected, the CAVC often grants a remand for another exam to resolve this discrepancy.    

 

 

Edited July 12, 2023 by broncovet

[brokensoldier244th]

Oh absolutely! But, as Bronc said, when they are meeting with you they are more subjective, even cordial sometimes,  because you are right there. When they write the report may be some days later after they have reviewed the rest of the record and that can change what the overall observation is. They aren’t supposed to make judgement calls like that in the examination. 

[Dustoff1970]

Early this year I had  three QTC professional exams for GERD, HTN and Tinnitus and both the NP, PA  and Audio specialist were very polite and said they saw no problems with me being rated for those disabilities.

Within less than six weeks I received from VARO a 60% rating for GERD, 10% for Tinnitus and 0% for HTN.  Unlike a previous Reno VA C&P examiner they showed no bias against this gringo.   QTC was on the money!!!!!!!!!

The last two years the Board of Vet Appeals granted me 50% for OSA due to PTSD and VN AO heart disease increase to 60% plus SMC-S with 3 years backpay and stated the VA C&P examiner's negative opinion against me was deficient and without merit.

 

 

Edited July 13, 2023 by Dustoff1970