The Board has denied the veteran's request for a massage chair under Chapter 31 of Title 38 U.S.C.A. because there is no medical evidence showing how the massage chair would aid in achieving maximum independence in daily living.
The deciding factor: There was no medical basis provided to support the need for a massage chair as an independent living service, and the VRP found that it was not medically necessary.
- Claimed conditions
- not specified in the decision
- How they argued it
- Direct service connection
- Exposure basis
- None
- Rating
- Not verified here — check the original decision
- Decision date
- November 20, 2008
- Citation
- 0839987
This is a plain-language summary generated by AI from a public Board of Veterans’ Appeals decision. It can contain errors — always verify against the original. Search VA.gov for the original decision (opens in a new tab) using citation 0839987.
What this means for you
A final Board denial may be appealed to the U.S. Court of Appeals for Veterans Claims, generally within 120 days of the Board mailing date. A Supplemental Claim with new and relevant evidence is a separate option. Another Higher-Level Review of the Board decision is not available. Check your own notice: this historical decision does not set your deadline.
What you can do next
Use your own notice and decision stage. A remanded issue is not a final court-appealable denial. VA review guidance and CAVC filing instructions (U.S. federal; reviewed October 7, 2026).
Related decisions
Other Board decisions on a similar condition or argued the same way.
- Whole decision: Denied
The Board denied both the claims for an earlier effective date and increased evaluation for DIC benefits, finding that there were no additional circumstances warranting such increases.
- Whole decision: Denied
The claims for concurrent receipt of VA disability compensation and military retirement pay from January 1, 2014 to December 31, 2014, and proper payment pursuant to CRDP from January 1, 2005 to March 31, 2005 as the result of SMC have been denied. The Regional Office has already addressed these issues.
- Whole decision: Denied
The Board denied entitlement to special monthly compensation (SMC) based on the need of the Veteran's spouse for regular aid and attendance, finding that there is no evidence showing she meets the requirements for aid and attendance.
- Whole decision: Denied
The Veteran's spouse is not entitled to a higher rate of DIC benefits as she and the Veteran were not married for at least eight years, and there are no other factors that would allow for an increase in her benefits.
Free starter guide for your own claim
Reading this because you were denied or under-rated? Get the plain-English next steps — your appeal options, the deadline that protects you, and how appeals like yours turn out. One email, no spam.
We will only use this to send the guide. No spam, unsubscribe any time. We never sell your information.
We are not the VA. Veterans’ Rights is an independent resource built for veterans. We are not the U.S. Department of Veterans Affairs, not part of the government, and not endorsed by any government agency.
This is general information, not legal advice. For advice about your own situation, talk to a VA-accredited representative — many help for free.