Other conditions Board decisions

The Veteran's appeal for specially adapted housing was dismissed because he did not timely file a Notice of Disagreement using the proper form (VA Form 10182) to initiate an appeal to the Board.

The Board has decided to remand the case due to a pre-decisional duty to assist error, where there was no investigation following an allegation of misuse by the fiduciary. The Veteran's electronic claims folder does not contain supporting evidence for Guardian as his continued fiduciary.

The Board has granted the Veteran's claim for service connection for insomnia, finding that it is proximately due to his service-connected tinnitus.

The Board has dismissed the appeal regarding the contractual payment rate for home health services provided by the appellant in February 2020, as this matter is subject to a specific administrative dispute resolution process that does not allow for appellate review.

The Veteran's overpayment claims for tuition and fees, housing allowance, and books and supplies are being remanded due to an error in calculating the amount of the debts.

The Veteran's increased rating for craniofacial neuralgia first and second division of the left trigeminal nerve is granted, with a 10 percent rating.

The Veteran's appeal for waiver of overpayment was dismissed due to their death during the pendency of the appeal.

The appeal seeking payment or reimbursement for the cost of medical services performed from May 24, 2018 through May 30, 2018 has been dismissed as the benefit sought by this appeal has now been approved.

The Veteran's sensory loss of the left side of the face involving the fifth cranial nerve is granted a rating of 30 percent. The Veteran's memory loss symptoms are denied as not compensable.

The appeal is dismissed as the VA has already administratively approved the claim for payment of non-VA medical services provided to the Veteran in August 2019.

The Board denied the Veteran's claim for an initial rating in excess of 10 percent for residuals of a brain embolism, finding that the evidence did not support such a rating and that the reduction from 100% to 10% was proper.

The Board has determined that the decision regarding concurrent receipt of VA disability compensation and military pay in fiscal year 2019 is not final due to insufficient evidence, and thus the case must be remanded for further development.

The Veteran's appeal for an evaluation in excess of 30 percent for service-connected central retinal vein occlusion of the left eye has been dismissed due to administrative error resulting in duplicate appeals.

The Veteran's active-duty service from June 1969 to December 1971 does not meet the basic eligibility requirements for MGIB education benefits, and therefore his claim is denied.

The appeal for payment of non-VA emergency medical services provided from January 10, 2021 to January 14, 2021 is dismissed as the administrative action approving partial payment constitutes a reversal of the initial denial based on untimeliness.

The Board has determined that the Veteran's request for a waiver of recovery of an overpayment of VA pension benefits was not timely received. The appeal is remanded to allow for further development, specifically locating and uploading any missing waiver request.

The Veteran's cause of death was granted in a May 2021 rating decision. The appeal for the issues related to PTSD, HTN, back disability, and TDIU is remanded as there is no further jurisdiction over these claims due to the grant of service connection for cause of death.

The Board denied the appellant's request for eligibility to inter her deceased husband in a VA national cemetery due to his discharge from service being 'Other Than Honorable' (OTH). The appeal is dismissed as there is no legal basis to find that he is eligible.

The appeal of the April 2021 rating decision is dismissed as it granted all requested benefits, including DIC and DEA. The appellant did not file a VA Form 40-1330M for a Government Medallion.

The Board dismissed the appeal because it is not within its jurisdiction to review disputes related to Veterans Care Agreements (VCAs). The appellant's claim for additional payment under a VCA was dismissed as VA has no authority to resolve such disputes.