Other conditions decisions — 2024

The Veteran's claim for payment or reimbursement of non-VA medical services received on January 15, 2019 is denied as he was not treated in the VA healthcare system within the preceding 24 months.

The Veteran's appeal for a waiver of overpayment of Montgomery GI Bill educational assistance benefits was denied as the evidence did not meet the criteria for a waiver due to fault on the part of the Veteran and no undue hardship resulting from repayment.

The Board found that the overpayment of $36,135.84 was due to sole administrative error on VA's part without the Veteran's knowledge and is therefore invalid.

The Board denied the Appellant's claim for recognition as the surviving spouse of the Veteran due to a legally separated status, which did not meet the continuous cohabitation requirement.

The Veteran's thoracolumbar arthritis with intervertebral disc syndrome, left and right lower extremity radiculopathy, left hip trochanteric pain syndrome, right hip trochanteric pain syndrome, left knee patellofemoral pain syndrome, and right knee patellofemoral pain syndrome are all granted service connection.

The Board has granted service connection for insomnia, finding that the Veteran's current insomnia disorder had its onset during or is etiologically related to active service.

The Veteran's educational assistance benefits were denied as he was not enrolled in the course of study at The Art Institutes International Minnesota within 120 days before its closure.

The Board dismissed the appeal because the payment for dental services provided by a non-VA provider under a Veterans Care Agreement (VCA) is subject to specific administrative dispute resolution process that does not allow for appellate review.

The Veteran's eligibility for benefits under the PCAFC program is remanded due to a need for personal care services, and further evaluation is required to determine if participation in the program is beneficial and whether VA should designate a caregiver.

The Board is remanding the case to determine if the appellant can be recognized as a helpless child or an individual who bore the last expense of last sickness or burial of the Veteran, and then readjudicate her claim for an equal share of the accrued benefits among the four adult children of the Veteran.

The Board denied the appellant's claim for additional attorney fees based on past-due benefits awarded in a January 2021 rating decision and determined in a July 2021 fee decision, as the amount of past-due benefits was properly calculated.

The Board denied service connection for left arm nerve condition, right arm nerve condition, left hip bursitis, and right hip bursitis as there was no evidence linking these conditions to the Veteran's active service.

The Board dismissed the appeal for payment of non-VA medical care provided by Aegis Sciences Corporation on August 23, 2021, as it is not within the jurisdiction of the Board to review such claims due to contractual agreements between VA and the provider network.

The Veteran's appeal for special monthly compensation (SMC) based on the need for aid and attendance of another person was granted after the initial decision. The appeal is dismissed as moot because the grant constitutes a full grant of the benefit sought.

The Veteran's service-connected disabilities did not render him helpless or so nearly helpless as to require the regular aid and attendance of another person, resulting in a denial of SMC based on the need for aid and attendance.

The claim of service connection for the cause of the Veteran's death is dismissed. The claim for accrued benefits is also dismissed as moot.

The Board has determined that the appellant's claim for payment of non-VA ambulance expenses incurred on February 17, 2020 was not properly adjudicated under the provisions of 38 U.S.C. § 1725 and 38 C.F.R. § 17.1003 due to errors in the AOJ's decision process. The appeal is being remanded for further action.

The Board has dismissed the appeal as the ambulance transportation claim was resolved in favor of the Veteran when payment was issued by VHA.

The Board has remanded the case due to errors in the November 2019 rating decision and issues related to the appellant's eligibility as a substitute claimant.

The Veteran's claim for Post-9/11 GI Bill benefits was denied due to insufficient qualifying active-duty service. The Board has ordered a remand to obtain the necessary service personnel records and determine if any of the Veteran's periods of service constitute qualifying active-duty service.