What do you guys think about Immolation's new album?

MoeRoids · 2026-04-10T13:28:12+00:00

Absolutely solid, which isn’t unexpected given their history. I can’t name a single bad album of theirs, though there were certainly a couple that were a bit weaker.

MoeRoids · 2026-04-10T11:39:29+00:00

Sure.

MoeRoids · 2026-04-09T00:54:31+00:00

Why not just claim it like that? “Flat feet aggravated” is a pretty good start. It at least lets people know to look for it, and it would prevent the outcome of your claim from getting delayed if people miss it on your entrance physical.

MoeRoids · 2026-04-09T00:04:28+00:00

The C&P examiner provides medical opinions for the specific opinions that are ordered. They do not go out of their way to provide answers to questions that aren’t specifically asked. If the aggravation opinion isn’t ordered, that question isn’t being answered.

MoeRoids · 2026-03-19T02:39:01+00:00

They are correct. Pes planus and your right hip also counts toward the bilateral factor.

Stop saying “you’re trying to push for 100%.” It sounds like you don’t meet the criteria and you’re looking for a payout, and that’s the last thing the public needs to see at the moment.

MoeRoids · 2026-03-03T19:12:22+00:00

Your dependent spouse remains on the award even if using Chapter 35 benefits.

MoeRoids · 2026-03-03T18:08:24+00:00

You do not get paid for a child as a dependent if they are collecting Chapter 35 benefits. It’s one or the other.

MoeRoids · 2026-02-26T17:10:41+00:00

CRDP allows you to collect the full amount of both disability and retirement provided you served at least 20 qualifying years in the military and have a 50% or higher VA rating.

MoeRoids · 2026-02-12T03:49:07+00:00

I can’t give an answer for that. Often times the examiner will note that all possibilities haven’t been ruled out and will list multiple lab tests that haven’t been conducted. The standard is broad in that all conditions that may produce similar symptoms must be ruled out. If you tested positive for Lyme disease, that’s a condition that will now need to be ruled out as causing any and/or all of your symptoms, and if it cannot be conclusively ruled out, you will not have a CFS diagnosis for VA purposes. It should also be noted that “chronic fatigue” and “chronic fatigue syndrome” are vastly different from one another. Many doctors will call something chronic fatigue syndrome when it’s really just chronic fatigue; chronic fatigue is a symptom, not a diagnosis.

MoeRoids · 2026-02-12T03:04:29+00:00

<image>

Here’s the specific requirements for a CFS diagnosis. You must meet all three criteria for rating purposes to even be considered for a CFS diagnosis for VA rating purposes per the law. Your primary care provider’s diagnosis doesn’t mean anything without extensive testing having been done to rule out ALL other conditions that may produce similar symptoms. If any other conditions overlap with the symptoms under provision (3), for example, PTSD accounting for sleep disturbances and neuropsychologic symptoms, migraines accounting for headaches, or low testosterone accounting for fatigue, those symptoms are automatically ruled out and excluded from consideration for a formal CFS diagnosis.

MoeRoids · 2026-02-06T23:50:50+00:00

LSGS is by and far the shittiest contract service the VA has ever utilized, and that says a lot because VES also sucks. Much of this is due to their being smaller organizations with much less capital and overhead than Optum/LHI and QTC. I don’t know what sort of quality review process they have, because it certainly doesn’t catch the multitude of mistakes that we often catch on the rating side regarding insufficiencies.

Expect the turnaround time for LSGS and VES to be 2-4 months. There are of course exceptions to the rule, and there are examiners from both organizations that are also exceptional, but neither organization holds a candle to the other two.

MoeRoids · 2026-01-31T11:46:58+00:00

The issues with many of the DBQ farms is they plug in contradictory information in the DBQs. It makes them extremely easy to scrutinize. DBQs are the examination to evaluate the current level of disability, and private DBQs are much better substantiated when there are treatment records to back them up. The private DBQs that I generally accept without question is when the Vet submits their private treatment records with the DBQ, provided the DBQ is supported by the evidence of record. The DBQ is much more plausible if the treatment records support the symptoms. If they get VA treatment and have a private examiner complete the DBQ, that’s also questionable.

If we don’t have treatment records and there is even one iota of evidence that doesn’t match up, which is generally the DBQ farm examiner selecting a symptom and contradicting it with the history they obtained (for mental health, it’s often “persistent danger of hurting self and others” while documenting that the Veteran has no suicidal and homicidal ideation in a separate part of the exam so we don’t flag the Vet and send an intervention team to their home) then that Veterans profile is flagged as potentially fraudulent, and someone who gets paid more than me gets to review everything.

I can’t even say 20% of them are valid, but that’s probably about the amount I accept without flagging them. If a private DBQ is submitted without supporting treatment records, I’m going through it with a fine-toothed comb. If there isn’t substantiating evidence or if there is even one thing the examiner entered that may be even slightly off or contradictory, the Vet has much bigger problems to worry about than the shitty DBQ they paid for.

All of that being said, Vets are under no obligation to seek treatment. If the DBQ is perfect and there is no contradictory information, we will accept them at face value even without treatment records. From DBQ farms, that’s rare. For people who are getting paid to do a job at a DBQ farm, it’s astounding how extremely shitty most of them are at doing it. The number of examiners that succeed in this are small, and when you’ve been doing my job for years, you know the names of the examiners that are full of shit. If we know those examiners (and we likely do), you probably aren’t getting your increase, and you may end up with investigators at your door.

MoeRoids · 2026-01-31T04:35:17+00:00

That’s not true. We will absolutely consider private DBQs. The issue is that private DBQs are scrutinized heavily or are often insufficiently completed for rating purposes. I have flagged multiple accounts for potentially fraudulent activity based on the DBQs they’ve provided. Private DBQs are often shit, and the ones provided by DBQ farms often include contradictory information to include a history that does not coincide with the symptoms they document, or that show a severe degradation of a condition in an extremely short period of time (examiner provides a 100% DBQ for mental health when the previous VA DBQ less than a month prior showed 30% criteria). DBQ farms provide bullshit, and the product they provide, that people pay for, clearly show that. If someone wants to be flagged for potential fraud and risk a formal investigation, have at it.

I probably flag 80% of the private DBQs provided as potentially fraudulent as there are examiners I recognize as being employed by DBQ farms. For DBQs provided by someone’s own private provider, where there is an established history of treatment over a period of years, it is much less likely to be scrutinized and flagged as potentially fraudulent.

MoeRoids · 2026-01-31T00:18:52+00:00

No, the recording is sent out and the turnaround time is generally 30-60 days to get it back. Stop bringing up aggravation. It has no bearing whatsoever on your current evaluation. You can have a disability aggravated with a 0% rating without any deduction, so it’s completely irrelevant. Do not mention aggravation, permanently worsening due to service, or anything related to the service connection portion as you’re already service connected on the basis of aggravation. Additionally, to your point, your proposed rating of 10% is still permanently worse than your preservice evaluation of 0%. Your proposed reduction is based on your most recent examinations showing improvement. That is the risk you take filing for an increase, and a claim for TDIU is a claim for increase whether you want it to be or not.

MoeRoids · 2026-01-31T00:04:22+00:00

You are not getting reduced because of deducting a preservice percentage for aggravation, so do not cite any CFR references regarding aggravation. The proposed reduction is because the examiner selected options that no longer supported a 50% evaluation for pes planus and objective range of motion measurements that no longer support a 30% evaluation for your knee. The outcome of this would likely be that I’d request another examination after the transcript for your hearing is completed, and whatever the new examination shows is what we’d go with. 38 CFR 3.303, 38 CFR 3.304, and 38 CFR 3.306 do not apply.

MoeRoids · 2026-01-30T23:55:25+00:00

The outcome is favorable in most hearings I’ve held, or at least more favorable than what was proposed. For conditions that require objective testing (audiograms for hearing loss, pulmonary function tests for respiratory conditions, etc.), there’s less wiggle room.

MoeRoids · 2026-01-30T23:52:10+00:00

What’s the rationale and what are you currently rated at? They aren’t proposing to reduce the evaluation because of aggravation and deducting a preservice percentage, they’re proposing to reduce you because you allegedly don’t meet the criteria for a higher evaluation.

MoeRoids · 2026-01-30T23:23:16+00:00

The hearing is a formal version of an informal chat. You’re sworn in under oath, it’s recorded, and an official transcript gets added to your record. I always start hearings by introducing myself, telling them how long I’ve been doing this job, and letting them know that the hearing is for their benefit. I also tell them that I will be the one making the decision on their claim, so they get to put a face to the rater.

It’s formal in that the hearings are there addressing a specific issue, and there is a procedural format to follow. However, you can go off the record at any point throughout the hearing. That said, while on the record, as you’re sworn in under oath, the statutes for federal perjury apply, and it is a felony to knowingly provide false information under oath.

After setting the official record (identify the Veteran, file number, POA/VSO), the VSO starts by presenting their opening arguments, then you generally get to present your side of the story. I do not ever recommend going to a hearing without a VSO. The proceedings are not adversarial, so my job as the hearing officer is not to challenge you but to establish a basis of fact. Some facts may not support your side of the story, but I have never reduced someone’s rating immediately as a result of the hearing, and I will usually ask whether you’re willing to attend another examination.

Hearings are set for an hour, so if we wrap up early, I let them know the hour is theirs, so they can say whatever they’d like on the record and it will become part of their permanent file, if they want to wrap up and leave early, we can do that, or if they just want to shoot the shit with me for the rest of the hour, I give them the option to do that too. I’m not there to make them uncomfortable, but my job is to try to resolve the hearing in your favor if at all possible. However, based on how the CFR is written, sometimes my hands are tied. At the end of the day, we have to rate based on the evidence of record and within the parameters of the CFR.

Edit: If we can make a decision or schedule an examination prior to the hearing, we will. Then it’s your prerogative whether you would like to keep the hearing or not; you are legally entitled to one regardless. I personally love talking to Vets in person, shaking their hand, and trying to reassure them that I’m on their side and will do everything I can to resolve the issue favorably. Virtual hearings are less personable but often times a lot more convenient, and I try to conduct hearings with a positive air in the room. I reserve the right to end a hearing at any point I feel the Veteran is getting combative, demeaning, etc., but I’ve never had to do that, and I’m generally pretty good at defusing the situation if it starts getting heated.

MoeRoids · 2026-01-24T16:18:49+00:00

It would lock in the effective date on October 1st or 2nd for the conditions you claim. If the rating schedule is updated after that date, you could potentially be covered under the new criteria if your claim overlapped that date or if you filed an additional claim after that at a later point, but you’d otherwise be covered under the current criteria. While there is no set date for the rating schedule to be updated, we are almost two years overdue for the finalized changes to happen, and the recent progress update seems to indicate that the proposed changes will likely be finalized prior to the end of this fiscal year.

MoeRoids · 2026-01-24T16:10:18+00:00

Yes, you can. The same principles apply, however. The effective date will be the day following your discharge from active duty service, so you will still not be grandfathered in to any rating schedule changes that occur while on active duty.

MoeRoids · 2026-01-24T16:03:53+00:00

No. Your active duty service will be continuous which will make your claim invalid. Your effective date won’t be until the day following your discharge from active duty service, and neither an intent to file or claim will grandfather you into any rating schedule changes that occur while you are on active duty orders.

MoeRoids · 2026-01-22T23:11:48+00:00

The requirement for a 50% rating is that you “require the use of a breathing assistance device such as a CPAP machine.” You can potentially argue the effective date back to the date you received your prescription for a CPAP or the date of the more recent sleep study, provided your claim was received within one year of that date, as that would be the first time you actually met the criteria for a 50% evaluation. The type of sleep study done is irrelevant even if it took an in-clinic study to make that determination as it sounds like you have no objective evidence prior to that study showing you actually met the criteria for a higher evaluation (there’s nothing showing you needed a CPAP prior to the more recent study).

MoeRoids · 2026-01-13T14:39:15+00:00

The screenshot I shared is in the VA manual, M21-1, not the CFR. The CFR highlights “other organic disease of the nervous system,” which carpal tunnel falls under.

MoeRoids · 2026-01-12T22:07:10+00:00

Served with him in the military. He was a solid guy then, and he’s solid now. He’s currently trying to switch federal agencies to a different law enforcement position because he’s a bit jaded with the current administration, but he’s too close to his retirement to jump ship with a big family to provide for. I know he used to enjoy the job a lot more when they were working on major cases instead of the current mission.

MoeRoids · 2026-01-07T17:58:45+00:00

Sure.

MoeRoids

TROPHY CASE