Clicky

09-31 071, 1518738 – CourtListener.com


09-31 071, 1518738 – CourtListener.com

If you have not yet been out for 1 year, I would recommend you call the 800# to the VA tommorrow morning, or get on the VA website and file claims for the conditions you feel are service connected to include the hearing loss, tinnitus, and anything else you were treated for or were diagnosed while you were in, or within 1 year of separation. I am a multi-service veteran, nearly 30 years. I have 2 VA doctors who provided letters to the RO in Roanoke, VA stating also that my diabetes and high blood pressure is connected to my depression/anxiety/PTSD. In a VA letter dated February 4, 2011, it was determined that I met the criteria and was granted a service connection disability that included Tinnitus and Bilateral hearing loss. However, it doesn’t officially agree with the magnitude of the problem. The bilateral factor will be applied to such bilateral disabilities before other combinations are carried out and the rating for such disabilities including the bilateral factor in this section will be treated as 1 disability for the purpose of arranging in order of severity and for all further combinations. §§ 1110, 1131, 5107 (West 2014); 38 C.F.R.

If received within 1 year from the date it was sent to the claimant, it will be considered filed as of the date of receipt of the informal claim. VA has a duty to notify and a duty to assist claimants in substantiating a claim for VA benefits. Would a bilateral factor be applicable with carpal tunnel?Thanks, as always. §§ 5103, 5103A; 38 C.F.R. §§ 3.159, 3.326(a). . Establishment of an event, injury or disease in service is fact specific.

Cir. Bash’s IM0s and a freeby from a former VA neuro..Unfortunately the VA completely ignored these opinions until the case went to the BVA. Bilateral sensorineural hearing loss (organic disease of the nervous system) is a “chronic disease” listed under 38 C.F.R. § 3.309(a); therefore, the presumptive service connection provisions of 38 C.F.R. This is the way it used to be, a few years ago the VA went through a big change and are now supossed to be better, This being said I am still awaiting my claims physicals. If the petition is denied, then the Federal Circuit’s decision becomes final. a.
09-31 071, 1518738 – CourtListener.com

See Fountain v. Still not receiving word, Desario sought representation by Sullivan, an equal justice works/Americorps attorney fellow in the Veterans Legal Corps at Community Legal Services of Mid-Florida, as part of their veterans advocacy project. App. I’ve taken the one word speech recognition test and I think it was valid. § 3.309(a) include tinnitus as an organic disease of the nervous system). I hope your right. Hi, need some advise on a NOD or reconsideration of a denied claim.

§ 3.385. , 474 (1995) (the Court held that it could not interpret the results of an audiograph because interpretation requires a factual finding, which is not the role of the Court in the first instance, and further indicated that the Board was empowered to make such factual findings in the first instance). The July 2008 VA examiner provided a diagnosis of sensorineural hearing loss in both ears. Changing any record at VA is a serious problem. § 7105. The Veteran contends that he had noise exposure in service because he was a truck mechanic and was often on the firing range without ear protection. His statements are competent and credible as his DD-214 shows that he was a heavy vehicle operator in service.

Under 38 U.S.C.A. § 1154(a), due consideration shall be given to the places, types, and circumstances of the Veteran’s service as shown by the Veteran’s service record and all medical and lay evidence. In summary, the Board finds that the evidence establishes that the Veteran was exposed to significant noise during service, currently has bilateral hearing loss and tinnitus, has had tinnitus since service, and has had continuous symptoms of hearing loss and tinnitus since service. Therefore considering the totality of the evidence the Board finds that the evidence is at least equipoise on the question of a nexus between service and the current bilateral hearing loss and tinnitus. Resolving reasonable doubt in the Veteran’s favor, the claim of service connection for bilateral hearing loss and tinnitus is granted. 38 U.S.C.A. § 5107(b); 38 C.F.R.

§ 3.102.