The appeal is remanded to the RO for further development, including obtaining additional evidence and conducting special vestibular testing.
The deciding factor: Further development of the service connection issue is required before adjudicating the special monthly compensation issues due to their interwoven nature.
- Claimed conditions
- vestibular dysfunction
- How they argued it
- Not specified
- Exposure basis
- None
- Rating assigned
- None in this decision
- Decision date
- January 26, 2009
- Citation
- 0902595
Veterans Law Judge
Decisions by this judge: 2,642 · Granted: 19% (granted or partly granted, in the vetted decisions on this site)
Judge attribution: 2025 complete; earlier years partial.
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. Look up the original decision on VA.gov (opens in a new tab) using citation 0902595.
What this means for you
A remand is not a loss. The Board sent the case back for more development — often a new exam or missing records — before making a final decision. Many remands later end in a grant, and the decision spells out exactly what the Board wanted to see.
What you can do next
Related decisions
Other Board decisions on a similar condition or argued the same way.
- Denied
The Board denied the Veteran's claim of service connection for benign paroxysmal positional vertigo, finding that his condition is not causally related to active service.
- Partly granted
The Veteran was granted a 70 percent initial disability rating for PTSD effective December 2, 2021, but the claim for an increased rating in excess of 70 percent was denied. The appeal also included claims for service connection and ratings for various conditions, some of which were granted while others were remanded.
- Remanded (sent back)
The Veteran's claim for a compensable rating for his service-connected left ear hearing loss with vestibular dysfunction is being remanded due to pre-decisional duty-to-assist errors, including the need to associate VA treatment records and obtain private treatment records. A new examination is also required.
- Remanded (sent back)
The Board has decided to remand the case due to a failure to obtain complete service treatment records and because of the PACT Act, which provides for an additional theory of entitlement for service connection due to toxic exposure. The appellant's claim will be reconsidered with the provision of a VA examination and medical opinion regarding his participation in a TERA.
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.