Jump to content

Ask Your VA Claims Questions | Read Current Posts 
Read VA Disability Claims Articles
Search | View All Forums | Donate | Blogs | New Users | Rules 

Top 10 VA Disability Claims Articles

  • tbirds-va-claims-struggle (1).png

  • 01-2024-stay-online-donate-banner.png

     

  • 0

The VA sure doesn't follow the law

Rate this question

kidva

Asked by kidva,

 Share

Question

kidva Apprentice

kidva

Posted
Posted

Well today during one of my Google VA law search. I find this 

 

This statement means that before the passing of Public Law 96-12, a Veteran could only qualify for the higher levels of Special Monthly Compensation (SMC) under 38 U.S.C. 1114(r)(1) and 1114(r)(2) if they were already receiving SMC based on the criteria outlined in 38 U.S.C. 1114(o), essentially requiring a more severe disability level to access the higher SMC rates. 
 
Key points to understand: 
 
  • SMC:
    Special Monthly Compensation is a higher rate of disability compensation paid to Veterans with particularly severe service-connected disabilities that meet specific criteria. 
     
     38 U.S.C. 1114(o):
  • This section of the law outlines specific criteria for SMC eligibility, which, before the enactment of PL 96-12, was considered a prerequisite for accessing the even higher SMC rates under 1114(r)(1) and 1114(r)(2). 
     
  • PL 96-12:
    This piece of legislation likely changed the rules, allowing Veterans to qualify for the higher SMC rates under 1114(r) without necessarily meeting the full criteria for 1114(o). 
     
     
    Well it seem based on law a veteran no longer has to be smc o to get smc r or r 2.  Now if a veterans has smc l need of help . why isn't the VA addressing smc r based on the law 
Link to comment
Share on other sites
  • Answers 10
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters For This Question

Popular Days

Top Posters For This Question

Popular Days

Popular Posts

Tbird
Tbird

I believe the public law is PL 96-128. PL 96-12 is mentioned once, but it appears where 96-128 appears. It seems most likely a typo in the manual; all other public laws are linked, but PL 96-12 is not

Posted Images

10 answers to this question

Recommended Posts

  • 0
  • Moderator
brokensoldier244th Grand Master

brokensoldier244th

Posted
  • Moderator
Posted

And you are neglecting the fact that the law change wasn’t enforceable until last month, so I guess we’re even. 

The Earth is degenerating these days. Bribery and corruption abound.Children no longer mind their parents, every man wants to write a book,and it is evident that the end of the world is fast approaching. --17 different possible sources, all lacking verifiable attribution.

B.S. Doane College, Mgt Info Systems/Systems Analysis 2008

M.S.Ed. Purdue University, Instructional Development and Technology, Feb. 2021

M.S. Purdue University Information Technology/InfoSec, Dec 2022

100% P/T

MDD

Spine

Radiculopathy

Sleep Apnea

Some other stuff

-------------------------------------------
B.S. Info Systems Mgt/Systems Analysis-Doane College 2008
M.S. Instructional Technology and Design- Purdue University 2021

 

(I AM NOT A RATER- I work the claims BEFORE they are rated, annotating medical evidence in your records, VA and Legal documents,  and DA/DD forms- basically a paralegal/vso/etc except that I also evaluate your records based on Caluza and try to justify and schedule the exams that you go to based on whether or not your records have enough in them to warrant those)

Link to comment
Share on other sites
  • 0
  • Community Owner
Rattler Mentor

Rattler

Posted
  • Community Owner
Posted

Don't depend on Google searches even with the new AI.  PL. 96-12 (1979) does not apply to the VA. PL 96-128 does apply to the VA and SMC. Also on the new provisions of Barry v. McDonough has not been implemented into M21.

Barry v. McDonough: A Landmark Decision for Veterans Receiving Special Monthly Compensation

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites
  • 0
  • Founder
Tbird Grand Master

Tbird

Posted
  • Founder
Posted

I believe the public law is PL 96-128. PL 96-12 is mentioned once, but it appears where 96-128 appears. It seems most likely a typo in the manual; all other public laws are linked, but PL 96-12 is not. This also leads me to believe it is a typo.

Tbird
 

Founder HadIt.com Veteran To Veteran LLC - Founded Jan 20, 1997

 

HadIt.com Veteran To Veteran | Community Forum | RallyPoint | FaceBook | LinkedIn | About Me

 

Time Dedicated to HadIt.com Veterans and my brothers and sisters: 65,700 - 109,500 Hours Over Thirty Years

 

diary-a-mad-sailor-signature-banner.png

I am writing my memoirs and would love it if you could help a shipmate out and look at it.

I've had a few challenges, perhaps the same as you. I relate them here to demonstrate that we can learn, overcome, and find purpose in life.

The stories can be harrowing to read; they were challenging to live. Remember that each story taught me something I would need once I found my purpose, and my purpose was and is HadIt.com Veterans.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
 Share
Go to question listing


  • Tell a friend

    Love HadIt.com’s VA Disability Community Vets helping Vets since 1997? Tell a friend!

  • Recent Achievements

    • Conversation Starter
      alexpainter
      alexpainter earned a badge
      Conversation Starter
    • One Month Later
      Lebro
      Lebro earned a badge
      One Month Later
    • Week One Done
      catyvaz1
      catyvaz1 earned a badge
      Week One Done
    • First Post
      AFguy1999
      AFguy1999 earned a badge
      First Post
    • Conversation Starter
      AFguy1999
      AFguy1999 earned a badge
      Conversation Starter

  • Our picks

    • VA Disability Claims: 5 Game-Changing Precedential Decisions You Need to Know

      Tbird posted a record in VA Claims and Benefits Information,

      These decisions have made a big impact on how VA disability claims are handled, giving veterans more chances to get benefits and clearing up important issues.

      Service Connection

      Frost v. Shulkin (2017)
      This case established that for secondary service connection claims, the primary service-connected disability does not need to be service-connected or diagnosed at the time the secondary condition is incurred 1. This allows veterans to potentially receive secondary service connection for conditions that developed before their primary condition was officially service-connected. 

      Saunders v. Wilkie (2018)
      The Federal Circuit ruled that pain alone, without an accompanying diagnosed condition, can constitute a disability for VA compensation purposes if it results in functional impairment 1. This overturned previous precedent that required an underlying pathology for pain to be considered a disability.

      Effective Dates

      Martinez v. McDonough (2023)
      This case dealt with the denial of an earlier effective date for a total disability rating based on individual unemployability (TDIU) 2. It addressed issues around the validity of appeal withdrawals and the consideration of cognitive impairment in such decisions.

      Rating Issues

      Continue Reading on HadIt.com
      • 0 replies
      Tbird

      Picked By

      Tbird,

    • Are all military medical records on file at the VA?

      RichardZ posted a topic in How to's on filing a Claim,

      I met with a VSO today at my VA Hospital who was very knowledgeable and very helpful.  We decided I should submit a few new claims which we did.  He told me that he didn't need copies of my military records that showed my sick call notations related to any of the claims.  He said that the VA now has entire military medical record on file and would find the record(s) in their own file.  It seemed odd to me as my service dates back to  1981 and spans 34 years through my retirement in 2015.  It sure seemed to make more sense for me to give him copies of my military medical record pages that document the injuries as I'd already had them with me.  He didn't want my copies.  Anyone have any information on this.  Much thanks in advance.  
      • 4 replies
      RichardZ

      Picked By

      RichardZ,
    • Caluza Triangle defines what is necessary for service connection

      Caluza Triangle defines what is necessary for service connection

      Tbird posted a record in VA Claims and Benefits Information,

      Caluza Triangle – Caluza vs Brown defined what is necessary for service connection. See COVA– CALUZA V. BROWN–TOTAL RECALL

      This has to be MEDICALLY Documented in your records:

      Current Diagnosis.   (No diagnosis, no Service Connection.)

      In-Service Event or Aggravation.
      Nexus (link- cause and effect- connection) or Doctor’s Statement close to: “The Veteran’s (current diagnosis) is at least as likely due to x Event in military service”
      • 0 replies
      Tbird

      Picked By

      Tbird,

    • Post in ICD Codes and SCT CODES?WHAT THEY MEAN?

      Timothy cawthorn posted an answer to a question,

      Do the sct codes help or hurt my disability rating 
      yellowrose

      Picked By

      yellowrose,

    • Post in Chevron Deference overruled by Supreme Court

      broncovet posted a post in a topic,

      VA has gotten away with (mis) interpreting their  ambigious, , vague regulations, then enforcing them willy nilly never in Veterans favor.  

      They justify all this to congress by calling themselves a "pro claimant Veteran friendly organization" who grants the benefit of the doubt to Veterans.  

      This is not true, 

      Proof:  

          About 80-90 percent of Veterans are initially denied by VA, pushing us into a massive backlog of appeals, or worse, sending impoverished Veterans "to the homeless streets" because  when they cant work, they can not keep their home.  I was one of those Veterans who they denied for a bogus reason:  "Its been too long since military service".  This is bogus because its not one of the criteria for service connection, but simply made up by VA.  And, I was a homeless Vet, albeit a short time,  mostly due to the kindness of strangers and friends. 

          Hadit would not be necessary if, indeed, VA gave Veterans the benefit of the doubt, and processed our claims efficiently and paid us promptly.  The VA is broken. 

          A huge percentage (nearly 100 percent) of Veterans who do get 100 percent, do so only after lengthy appeals.  I have answered questions for thousands of Veterans, and can only name ONE person who got their benefits correct on the first Regional Office decision.  All of the rest of us pretty much had lengthy frustrating appeals, mostly having to appeal multiple multiple times like I did. 

          I wish I know how VA gets away with lying to congress about how "VA is a claimant friendly system, where the Veteran is given the benefit of the doubt".   Then how come so many Veterans are homeless, and how come 22 Veterans take their life each day?  Va likes to blame the Veterans, not their system.   
      Lemuel

      Picked By

      Lemuel,
    View All
×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

Guidelines and Terms of Use

  I accept