Does anybody agree that this is NOT new and material evidence?!
After 17 months, we got a denial from Regional last week. The reason: Your evidence wasn't new and material. Does anybody have any insight into which one of us -- the rater or myself -- is...
View ArticleRe: Does anybody agree that this is NOT new and material evidence?!
I am not saying I know what happened with this injury! Holy Freakin' toledo,I just gave an example and recommended what course of action they could take by reviewing the record. I have no idea what...
View ArticleRe: Does anybody agree that this is NOT new and material evidence?!
For anybody interested, mostly the entire claim is pasted below, should you actually want to test how red your eyes can get! I figured that you have all been so generous and interested that I would...
View ArticleRe: Does anybody agree that this is NOT new and material evidence?!
I don't even know if I can stay awake that long.That is a good thing. Since the examiner focused on whether or not the VA caused the infection and gave a no. Now the problem comes along about the...
View ArticleRe: Does anybody agree that this is NOT new and material evidence?!
dbcsf wrote: there was no keratitis; this was retinitis USNDW, to answer the question, no, the ophthalmologist reviewing the case for the VARO in 2005 did not know that the basis of the claim should...
View ArticleRe: Does anybody agree that this is NOT new and material evidence?!
dbcfs, when I am saying IF, what I mean is that those of us here piping in, don't really know what happened, and the IF is if you can find an examiner to review the treatment records from the first...
View ArticleRe: Does anybody agree that this is NOT new and material evidence?!
USNDW wrote: And the statement from the other examiner who recommended the correct treatment, do you have copies of that in the record? If so, I don't see how a DRO could ignore that. A doctor going...
View ArticleRe: Does anybody agree that this is NOT new and material evidence?!
I certainly take USNDW's point that a DRO could say "oh, wow" to the seeming multiple missteps by the ophthalmologist and E.R. And we both take the point that our "layman" explanations aren't going to...
View ArticleRe: Does anybody agree that this is NOT new and material evidence?!
Just for the sake of saying it again, I made it pretty clear that I thought he would need an opinion from an expert who could opine on the treatment, lack of, and then incorrect. An examiner could...
View ArticleRe: Does anybody agree that this is NOT new and material evidence?!
dbcsf wrote: I wonder if the hearing request is a bad idea. I believe that most ROs are backed up on hearing requests so it may drag things out a little longer, but it's probably going to drag out...
View ArticleRe: Does anybody agree that this is NOT new and material evidence?!
Just my two cents worth, file an appeal. From what I have been reading recently, it is extremely difficult to get the Regional Office to overturn itself, especially on close calls. Unless the...
View ArticleRe: Does anybody agree that this is NOT new and material evidence?!
If history is any lesson, a veteran will never get a DRO review that overturns the decision of the VA Examiner absent any N&M evidence. Add the codicil, as Greatbigblock does, that the...
View ArticleRe: Does anybody agree that this is NOT new and material evidence?!
greatbigblock wrote: Just my two cents worth, file an appeal. From what I have been reading recently, it is extremely difficult to get the Regional Office to overturn itself, especially on close...
View ArticleRe: Does anybody agree that this is NOT new and material evidence?!
dbcsf You posted: Because my relative didn't serve in war time, he has no service connection. "Wartime service" is not a requirement for service connection. It IS a requirement for pension, but not...
View ArticleRe: Does anybody agree that this is NOT new and material evidence?!
You need to keep this in perspective. When you file an 1151 claim, you are essentiallly asking the VA to admit to their own mistake. They did not do that, this time, and are unlikely to do so in the...
View ArticleRe: Does anybody agree that this is NOT new and material evidence?!
broncovet wrote: When you file an 1151 claim, you are essentiallly asking the VA to admit to their own mistake. This is not a claim for ametuers or VSO's. You need a lawyer to file an appeal on the...
View ArticleRe: Does anybody agree that this is NOT new and material evidence?!
well, Cruiser, you were dead right. It took us months to find an ophthalmologist who would write anything for a claim, but we found one. It cost us, but we found one. He reviewed the records and wrote...
View ArticleRe: Does anybody agree that this is NOT new and material evidence?!
Cruiser knows the system and you can take his advice to the bank!
View ArticleRe: Does anybody agree that this is NOT new and material evidence?!
We won. But my cousin got only a 70% rating despite the fact that he can't see a darn thing, and they made it effective Jan. 2010, even though the first 1151 claim for this condition was filed in 2004...
View ArticleRe: Does anybody agree that this is NOT new and material evidence?!
dbcsf: Issues regarding effective date of award really do require the veteran to review the all the adjudicative evidence in the C-File. You can request a copy of the C-File by filing a written...
View ArticleRe: Does anybody agree that this is NOT new and material evidence?!
That's an excellent PDF. Thanks very much. It's been a long week, so my brain started to cramp by page 37, but this will be an excellent reference for poking around in the regulations. An interesting...
View Article
