The Board denied the Veteran's claims for initial compensable disability ratings for service-connected hallux valgus of both great toes, finding that the current severity of his bilateral hallux valgus more nearly approximates a noncompensable rating due to functional loss and pyramiding issues with another service-connected condition (bilateral pes planus).
The deciding factor: The Veteran's bilateral hallux valgus is rated according to Diagnostic Code 5280, which provides ratings for unliteral hallux valgus. The Board found that the current severity of his bilateral hallux valgus does not meet the criteria for a compensable rating due to functional loss and pyramiding issues with another service-connected condition (bilateral pes planus).
- Claimed conditions
- hallux valgus
- How they argued it
- Direct service connection
- Exposure basis
- None
- Rating assigned
- None in this decision
- Decision date
- September 7, 2023
- Citation
- 23049221
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 23049221.
What this means for you
A denial is a starting point, not the end of the road. You can see why this claim fell short — and, if you are still inside the one-year window, the appeal lanes that may remain open to you.
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 for service connection for hallux valgus, finding no competent and credible evidence linking her current condition to active service.
- Granted
The Veteran's left foot metatarsalgia is granted as secondary to his service-connected left foot Lisfranc fracture and other disabilities. The Veteran's TDIU benefits from December 1, 2023 are denied due to his employment as a government tax collector.
- Remanded (sent back)
The Board has decided to remand the case due to an inadequate VA examination, requiring a new one with a proper evaluation of the Veteran's foot disabilities.
- Remanded (sent back)
The Board has decided to remand the case due to insufficient medical opinions regarding the preexistence and aggravation of foot disabilities during service.
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.