Other conditions Board decisions

The Board has dismissed the appeal as it does not have jurisdiction to review disputes arising under Veterans Care Agreements (VCAs) due to specific statutory and regulatory provisions.

The Veteran's right and left foot talipes cavus were granted a rating of 20 percent each, effective from December 16, 2015, to January 6, 2021. The appeal was successful for the period prior to December 16, 2015.

The Board has dismissed the appeal regarding the contractual payment rate for non-VA medical services provided in January 2020, as this matter is governed by statutory and contractual authority that does not allow for review by the Board.

The Board denied the appellant's claim for recognition as the surviving spouse of the Veteran, finding that she did not meet the eligibility requirements due to a legal impediment to marriage and lack of knowledge regarding the State of California's requirement for ceremonial marriage.

The Board has determined that the termination of the Veteran's VA compensation benefits due to fugitive felon status was improper and has restored his benefits from March 14, 2019, to March 18, 2020.

The Board has dismissed the appeal regarding the contractual payment rate for medical services provided by the appellant from March 2, 2020, to March 20, 2020, as this matter is governed by a specific administrative dispute resolution process that does not allow for appellate review.

The Board has dismissed the appeal as there is no administrative review process for disputes related to contractual payment rates under Veterans Care Agreements (VCAs).

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

The Veteran transferred education benefits under Chapter 33 (Post-9/11 GI Bill) to his daughter, who is the appellant. The appellant's application for use of these transferred benefits was received after she turned 26 years old, which ended her eligibility under the law. Therefore, the appeal is denied.

The Board has remanded the case due to a failure to obtain VA treatment records from 1999-2013, including those from the Oakland VAMC. The appellant must provide these records for further review.

The appeal of the issue regarding payment or reimbursement for non-VA medical services provided on April 20, 2020, has been dismissed as the benefit sought has already been granted.

The Veteran's appeal for a waiver of the recoupment of an overpayment debt has been withdrawn, and thus the case is dismissed.

The Veteran's appeal for a waiver of overpayment in the amount of $8,681.51 has been dismissed due to his death.

The Veteran's appeal for a total disability rating based on individual unemployability (TDIU) has been dismissed as the Veteran withdrew his appeal prior to any decision being made.

The Veteran's claim for additional dependency benefits based on his daughter's school attendance after May 1, 2006 is denied as the application was not timely filed within one year of her 18th birthday.

The Board dismissed the issue of the timeliness of the VA Form 9 received by the VA on June 8, 2018 because it was previously adjudicated and is no longer in controversy.

The Board has granted service connection for loss of use of the bilateral lower extremities and awarded SMC at the R-1 level based on need for regular aid and attendance. The Veteran's combined rating is now 100 percent, which includes his already existing SMC-L.

The Board has decided to remand the case for further action, including determining who is responsible for the overpayment debt and providing them with an opportunity to respond. The debtor(s) will also be given a chance to seek a waiver of their overpayment debt.

The Board dismissed the appeal regarding whether the payment rate for home health services provided by the appellant from February 3, 2020, through February 29, 2020, was proper due to a specific administrative dispute resolution process that does not allow for appellate review.

The Board has dismissed the appeal regarding the contractual payment rate for medical services provided by the appellant from January 3, 2020 to January 31, 2020 due to a specific administrative dispute resolution process that does not allow for appellate review.