Other conditions decisions — 2019

The VA denied the appellant's claim for Post-9/11 GI Bill educational assistance benefits because there is no showing that the service department approved a transfer request from the Veteran to his spouse.

The Veteran's callosities, both feet, are currently rated as 10 percent disabling. The Board has determined that a higher rating of 40 percent is warranted due to the presence of five or more painful and unstable scars (callosities). However, the claim for TDIU remains pending as notification requirements have not been fully satisfied.

The Veteran's appeal for a higher rating for his left foot disorder, which includes hallux valgus and hallux rigidus, is denied as the maximum schedular rating of 10% has been assigned.

The Board denied the Veteran's claim for service connection for gout, finding that there was no in-service incurrence or aggravation of a disease or injury and no evidence of a relationship between her current diagnosis of gout and her active duty. The Board also found no secondary service connection as the preponderance of the evidence did not support a finding that the Veteran's gout was proximately caused by, or the result of, her service-connected hypertension.

The Veteran's service-connected chondromalacia with mild arthritis of the left patellofemoral joint was granted an increased rating to 20 percent, effective from when the disability was initially service connected in July 1984.

The Veteran's request for a waiver of overpayment in the amount of $54,362.00 was denied due to it not being received within 180 days from notification of indebtedness. The Board is unable to make a determination without all relevant documents and will need to obtain them before proceeding.

The Veteran's claim for a 10 percent disability rating for multiple noncompensable service-connected disabilities prior to January 4, 2016 is denied as the issue of compensation under 38 C.F.R. § 3.324 is moot due to the assignment of a compensable rating for tinnitus.

The Veteran's surviving spouse is not entitled to a higher dependency and indemnity compensation rate under 38 U.S.C. § 1311(a)(2) because the Veteran and the appellant were not married for the entire eight-year period prior to the Veteran’s death.

The Veteran's death was not due to a service-connected disability, and therefore the appellant is not entitled to enhanced DIC benefits under 38 U.S.C. § 1311(a)(2).

The Veteran's appeal for reimbursement or payment of non-VA medical expenses for an emergency room visit at Osceola Regional Medical Center, Orlando, Florida, on August 16, 2014 has been withdrawn. As a result, the Board does not have jurisdiction to review this issue.

The Board denied a higher rate of nonservice-connected pension due to the Veteran's son's $800 payment in July 2015 being considered as income, resulting in the Veteran not meeting the criteria for a higher pension rate.

The Board has remanded the claims for service connection and compensation under 38 U.S.C. § 1151 due to incomplete records and need for a medical opinion.

The Board has remanded the case due to incomplete documentation and ambiguity regarding the Veteran's representative's wishes. The claim will be further developed to ensure all necessary information is provided.

The Veteran's claims for increased ratings for left and right medial tibial stress syndrome, as well as esophageal motility disorder with reflux, are being remanded due to the need for additional examinations.

The Veteran's claim for a compensable rating for left inguinal hernia was denied. The Board found that the preponderance of evidence did not support granting a higher rating from July 24, 2009 to January 23, 2015 and after March 1, 2015.

The Board has remanded the claims due to a failure to consider the Veteran's July 2015 statement regarding his symptoms of peripheral vascular disease, including claudication and atrophic changes.

The Board denied the appellant's claim for accrued benefits due to her grandmother's death and burial expenses as she is not a qualifying child for VA purposes.

The Board has determined that the appellant's claim for accrued benefits was timely filed, but the case is being remanded to allow the AOJ to adjudicate the merits of the claim and consider substitution in the Veteran's place if appropriate.

The Board denied the appellant's claim for accrued benefits as he did not provide sufficient evidence to show that he paid the Veteran's expenses of last sickness and burial.

The appeal is being remanded due to the addition of a new VA medical opinion and for readjudication considering all evidence added since the last SSOC.