The Board found that the unauthorized medical expenses incurred from May 6, 2011 to May 9, 2011 at [redacted] were for a condition of such a nature that a prudent layperson would have reasonably expected that delay in treatment would have been hazardous to life or health. The VA medical facilities were not feasibly available and an attempt to use them beforehand would not have been considered reasonable by a prudent layperson. Therefore, the Veteran's claim for payment or reimbursement was granted.
The deciding factor: The Board determined that the unauthorized medical expenses met the criteria under 38 U.S.C.A. § 1725 due to the nature of the condition and the lack of feasible VA options.
- Claimed conditions
- swelling of both legs, acute diastolic heart failure
- How they argued it
- Not specified
- Exposure basis
- None
- Rating assigned
- None in this decision
- Decision date
- August 25, 2016
- Citation
- 1633593
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 1633593.
What this means for you
A grant means the Board agreed the veteran was entitled to the benefit. Decisions like this show the kind of evidence and arguments that tend to succeed for claims like it.
What you can do next
Related decisions
Other Board decisions on a similar condition or argued the same way.
- Dismissed
The Board has dismissed the appeals for service connection of various conditions, including hypertension and related issues, due to the Veteran's death.
- Denied
The Board denied service connection for various conditions, including myasthenia gravis, gastrointestinal bleeding, hypertension, atrial fibrillation, CAD, aortic stenosis, and acute hypoxemic respiratory failure. The Board found that the evidence did not support a finding of in-service onset or relationship to service.
- Denied
The Board denied the Veteran's service connection claims for pes planus, low back problems, swelling of both hands, swelling of both legs, and ruptured appendix/appendectomy as there was no evidence showing a nexus between these conditions and his military service.
- Denied
The VA determined that the veteran's current leg swelling is not related to the prescribed medication he received during his hospitalization, and thus denied compensation under 38 U.S.C.A. § 1151.
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.