Other conditions Board decisions

The Board has remanded the case due to a lack of an addendum opinion addressing the relationship between the Veteran's service and his residual pain post right sesamoidectomy.

The Board has decided to remand the case due to a pre-decisional duty to assist error, including an inadequate medical opinion. The issue of eligibility for benefits under the PCAFC is being remanded.

The Board has decided to remand the case due to insufficient medical opinions regarding the etiology of the Veteran's left eye photophobia, specifically addressing his inservice incident with projector lights. Further development is required to address any secondary service-connected disabilities or medications.

The Veteran's claims for waiver of overpayment of costs for tuition and fees, as well as monthly housing allowance are being remanded due to insufficient evidence in the claims file to confirm how the overpayment was calculated. The AOJ is required to create a clear accounting showing all payments made and how the total overpayment debt was arrived at.

The Veteran and S.B. are eligible for the direct payment of attorney fees based on past-due benefits awarded in a July 11, 2022, rating decision to this extent, but the issue of reasonableness of these fees is remanded.

The Veteran's eligibility for benefits under the VA Program of Comprehensive Assistance for Family Caregivers (PCAFC) is being remanded due to a legally inadequate medical determination. The Board requires a more detailed and thoroughly explained medical opinion regarding personal care services needs.

Your appeal for payment of non-VA medical expenses on August 16, 2020 has been resolved by an administrative action. The claim was approved and you have received the payment.

The Veteran's appeal regarding his competency to handle disbursement of funds has been dismissed as the AOJ found him competent and resolved the issue in a prior decision.

The Veteran's claims for increased ratings and TDIU are being remanded due to the inclusion of pre-decisional errors in the November 2021 SSOC, including failure to consider updated VA treatment records and inadequate examination.

The Board has remanded the case due to new evidence submitted by the appellant, and the nature and etiology of the Veteran's right ear hearing loss is unclear. The cause of death claim will be reconsidered.

The appellant is not eligible for additional attorney fees beyond the $29,534.89 awarded in the August 2022 decision, based on 20 percent of the past-due benefits awarded in the June 2020 rating decision.

The Veteran's appeal for additional Post-9/11 GI Bill education benefits was denied because he had already exhausted his entitlement under the program, and thus could not receive an additional 12 months of benefits. The issue is related to a prior election made by the Veteran in November 2014.

The Board has decided to remand the case due to insufficient medical opinion regarding whether the Veteran's bilateral foot condition is related to his military service. The claim will be reconsidered with a new examination and opinion.

The Veteran's claim for service connection for an eye disability, including blurry vision, optic atrophy, retinal artery occlusion, and retinal vascular occlusion as secondary to her service-connected Multiple Sclerosis and chronic fatigue syndrome is remanded due to a pre-decisional duty to assist error.

The Veteran's appeal for a power wheelchair was dismissed because there is no denial of the benefit sought, and the Board does not have jurisdiction over this issue.

The appeal is dismissed as the claim for payment of medical services provided at Bethesda Hospital has been administratively approved and marked 'to be paid' by VA.

The Veteran's claim for special monthly compensation based on the need for aid and attendance and/or housebound status is remanded due to a lack of a VA examination focusing solely on his service-connected disabilities.

The Veteran's appeal for TDIU was dismissed because the VA Form 10182 submitted in April 2021 was not a valid appeal due to improper timing and lack of good cause.

The Veteran withdrew his appeal, and the Board dismissed it.

The Board dismissed the appeal because the claim was not properly filed by a recognized representative and did not identify the specific determination with which the Veteran disagreed.