Caring. Effective. Efficient.

BVA failed to consider PTSD Rating greater than 50%

BVA failed to consider PTSD Rating greater than 50%

"Symptom hunting"  is a common BVA error in a PTSD rating appeal, and we believed the BVA engaged in this practice when it denied our client anything more than a 50 percent PTSD rating. 

Here's how it happens: using the  list of examples of rateable symptoms in the VA's mental health diagnostic code, the BVA judge hunts through the record for those exact symptoms.

The problem with this approach is that assigning a PTSD rating is not a mechanical exercise - the BVA judge is required to conduct a "holistic analysis" of the Veteran's condition before assigning a rating. This requires evaluating - and comparing - the PTSD symptoms the veteran does have, and comparing their frequency, chronicity and severity to the VA's rating criteria for PTSD. 

In this case, the BVA judge hunted for symptoms to support a 50 percent PTSD rating, and to deny TDIU. 

After an extensive record review, and detailing the symptoms the veteran had which were not considered when the BVA judge assigned the 50 percent PTSD rating, the parties agreed to vacate the BVA decision and send it back through a Joint Motion to Remand.

Does this case sound like your VA Rating Decision or BVA Decision? If so, click here to have  Attig | Steel take a look at your case.

Link to the BVA Decision on CAVC Website.

Link to the Joint Motion to Remand the CAVC Website.

Case Details

OGC Attorney: Shereen M. Marcus

Veteran Representation at CAVC: Chris Attig (link to bio)

Board of Veterans Appeals Veterans Law Judge: Derek R. Brown

Regional Office: Montgomery, Alabama VARO

Vets’ Rep at BVA:  Adam Werner

Date of BVA Decision: March 15, 2016

Date of CAVC Judgment on Remand: January 21, 2017

Recent Cases

This case involves the BVA judge’s inadequate reasoning of a denial of a veteran’s claim for an increased rating for PTSD.   The appeal was resolved through a joint motion to remand. ISSUE ON APPEAL TO THE CAVC (BVA overlooked evidence… Read More
This case involves the BVA judge’s inadequate reasoning of his denial of a veteran’s past-due benefits in a claim for an increased rating due to an increase in the severity of the veteran’s PTSD. The appeal was resolved through a jo… Read More
This case involves the BVA’s failure to comply with a Veterans Court Order in a January 2020 Memorandum Decision. The appeal was resolved through a joint motion to remand. ISSUE ON APPEAL TO THE CAVC (BVA fails to comply with Veterans Court Ord… Read More

See More Appellate Results

Taking Point! Blog

May
23
After years of exploring different fields, I’ve found purpose-driven work here, at Attig | Curran | Steel.   There are a lot of variables in the experience of “happy.” It is difficult to keep it continuous.  Do I feel happy when my kids… Read More
May
18
When appellate courts review the decisions of lower courts – or in administrative law where a Court like the US Court of Appeals for Veterans Claims (CAVC) reviews the decisions of the BVA, an administrative tribunal – they use “… Read More
May
16
Let me tell you the story of two veterans. The first veteran – we’ll call him Jim – claimed he was exposed to herbicides – Agent Orange – outside of the Republic of Vietnam. After the VA spent decades denying his claim,… Read More
Mar
2
In January 2021, the loss of use of a reproductive organ for SMC purposes was the focus of a panel of judges from the U.S. Court of Appeals Veterans Claims issued a precedential opinion in Bria v. Wilkie.   The panel consisted of Judge Mere… Read More

Read the "Taking Point!" Blog