FROM THE BRANCH DAVIDIAN
RO CAPITOL IN TEXAS
OUR MOTTO?
BURN FIRST AND ASK
QUESTIONS LATER
Strolling through all the new releases of BVA decisions allows for little nuggets of info to be picked up. Here, I spotted a subtle new wrinkle to go with our new HCV medical form:
The record reveals that the Veteran submitted a claim of entitlement to service connection for hepatitis C. As will be discussed further below, the medical evidence of record reflects that the Veteran was diagnosed with infectious hepatitis during service, and a January 2003 letter from the Carter Blood Care Center reflects that the Veteran tested positive for hepatitis B core antibodies. See a January 2003 letter from Carter Blood Care Center. Concerning the Veteran's in-service diagnosis of hepatitis, the Board points out that hepatitis C was not diagnosed, nor could it have been, during the Veteran's service since hepatitis C was not specifically denominated as such until the 1980's. Further, the United States Court of Appeals for Veterans Claims (the Court) has held in Clemons v. Shinseki, 23 Vet. App. 1 (2009), that when a claimant makes a claim, he is seeking service connection for symptoms regardless of how those symptoms are diagnosed or labeled. In light of above, the Board has recharacterized the issue as entitlement to service connection for a hepatic disorder.
I like this one, too. Vet loses job. Vet tells VA in Claim. VA “construes” it to mean he wants to file for TDIU. Vet has a 0% or No% rating so he isn’t qualified to receive this. VA knows that so why did they do it?
In an September 2007 statement, the Veteran asserted that he was "dismissed" from his job because of "medical reason." See the Veteran's September 2007 statement. It appears that the RO construed this statement as a claim for TDIU. See Roberson v. Principi, 251 F.3d 1378, 1384 (Fed. Cir. 2001) (VA to "determine all potential claims raised by the evidence, applying all relevant laws and regulations"). Indeed, in a letter from the RO dated in November 2007, the RO notified the Veteran of the laws and regulations relating to TDIU claims and provided him a VA Form 21-8940 (Veteran's Application for Increased Compensation Based on Individual Unemployability) to complete. Servello v. Derwinski, 3 Vet. App. 196, 198-200 (1992). However, it does not appear that the Veteran completed and/or submitted the VA Form 21-8940, and the RO did not adjudicate the Veteran's TDIU claim.
Even money says that if he did apply, they may have slapped him with a fraudulent claim! We’ll never know.
This old boy will live to fight another day.
http://www.va.gov/vetapp11/Files4/1132924.txt
asknod
Bethanie Spangenberg
kcraveiro
robinhoodesqvetsatty
Wesley McCauley
Veterans Claims Help 
This happens everyday too.
Here’s one for ya’…
The VA in their infinite wisdom, inferred IU as part of my current claim because I made the statement to the C&P examiner (in a simple conversation of small talk) that I resigned a federal position due to the fact that I had neither the time, energy, nor the physical ability to continue chasing down the irrational demands of the two 20 something co-workers I refer to as “the sorority chicks” whos agenda was to get one of their BFF’s hired into my position.
As the convo continued, I went on to also include that I am currently employed in a job that I love.
Did that put any question of IU to rest? Heck no! There it is right there in my “claimed conditions”.
I can’t wait to get the denial for IU to add to my TP collection of past comical decisions made by those poor, overworked, legends called “raters”.
Notice how the VA cleverly put this Vet on the hamster wheel without even him knowing. You see, when the claim was “recharacterized the issue as entitlement to SERVICE CONNECTION for a hepatic disorder.”
Let me interpret this to reality. The Veteran will have to appeal for SERVICE CONNECTION. Then when he finally wins, the RO will award 0%. ON to the hamster wheel of delay and denial, the Veteran will spend 5 years more appealing the percentage. Then, if he finally gets his percentage, it will necessitate an appeal for the effective date. The end result will be making the Veteran appeal at least 3 times what could have been accomplished in one. This ensures the VA wont be paying this Vet any benefits until Obamas kids are president. Why should the VA combine this when they can string the Vet out for a couple decades on a hamster wheel?