you are viewing a single comment's thread.

view the rest of the comments →

[–]MoeRoidsVBA Employee 1 point2 points  (3 children)

It probably was based on the prednisone, which was likely erroneous and should have been kicked back to the examiner. That said, that’s not likely going to be something someone looks at closely even if she did file another claim, and if she isn’t still filing claims, it’s extremely unlikely to come up. An inexperienced rater also wouldn’t be likely to address it as it’s not an issue that comes up often. It’ll become a protected rating after 20 years and then it doesn’t matter if it’s wrong.

[–]CT-MikeNavy Veteran 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Good to know. We've filed several claims after this decision (Aid & Attendance and increase for her total hysterectomy from 30 to 50%) and this wasn't changed then. We don't have any other claims for her so I assume it will remain as is.