Jump to content



Search



Shoutbox Open the Shoutbox in a popup
@  carlie : (30 August 2014 - 06:27 PM) Vet211060 - I Guess They're Not That Shameful After All : - ) Congrats On Some Positive Adjudication
@  vet201060 : (30 August 2014 - 04:24 PM) Dav Sent Letter Saying I Am 100% Effective Oct 2013
@  MarkInTexas : (30 August 2014 - 12:35 PM) Wish There Was A "like" Button For Some Of These Comments.......
@  MarkInTexas : (30 August 2014 - 12:26 PM) Amen To That!
@  vet201060 : (28 August 2014 - 09:55 PM) Va Is So Shameful!!
@  artlouis : (27 August 2014 - 11:36 AM) Code 7019
@  vet201060 : (26 August 2014 - 11:41 PM) Damn Post It Notes
@  vet201060 : (26 August 2014 - 11:41 PM) True That
@  Asiadaug : (26 August 2014 - 07:46 PM) I Have Yet To Deal With Any Piece Of Va That Isn't A Dysfunctional Mess...ebenefits, Claim Filing, Billing...and To Think Our Tax Dollars Are Used To Perpetuate That Calamity!
@  carlie : (26 August 2014 - 05:39 PM) notorious kelly - loved your shout ! ! !
@  GlassRose1500 : (26 August 2014 - 03:40 PM) Would Someone Add Smc Housbound Plus Smc A&a Regular And One Smc K For Me? I Can't Seem To Do That Math!
@  Notorious Kelly : (26 August 2014 - 03:12 PM) Ebenefits Is Not A Thermometer In The Rectum Of Your Claim; It Is A Post-It Note That May Or Not Be Updated Or Accurate. Try Not To Obsess ;)
@  mcassidy : (26 August 2014 - 01:25 PM) Osa
@  Jaluluah11B : (26 August 2014 - 10:05 AM) My Reconsideration Finally Showed Up On Ebenefits As A New Claim.  gathering Evidence.  [font=Arial][size=3]Automated 5103 Notice Response Needed. [/size][/font]
@  vet201060 : (26 August 2014 - 10:00 AM) Went From Pending Decision Approval To Review Of Evidence Today, I Need To Stop Looking At It. Drives You Crazy Waiting
@  GlassRose1500 : (25 August 2014 - 09:30 PM) @coriemboh I Get My Best Claim Advice Here, But My Dav Guy Gets The Best Intel Once The Claim Is Filed
@  coriemboh : (25 August 2014 - 08:57 PM) The Average Processing Time Is 9 Months More Or Less. Every Time I Call The 800#, I Get A Different Answer. Goe, Roe....make Up Your Mind!
@  coriemboh : (25 August 2014 - 08:56 PM) I Just Want To Know Ballpark Figure Of How Much Longer My Claim Will Take. The Bills Are Piling Up. Adds To My Anxiety And Depression. Sure Wish I Could Tell Bill Collectors The Same Things Va Tells Me!
@  coriemboh : (25 August 2014 - 08:54 PM) @glassrose1500-No, I Don't. I Put In For Representation A Few Days Ago, But I'm Sure That End Won't Pan Out Until The Claim Is Closed.
@  GlassRose1500 : (25 August 2014 - 12:11 PM) Would Appreciate Feedback On My Smc Draft - Posted In The Smc Section! Tkx!

Photo

Va Fl 06-28


This topic has been archived. This means that you cannot reply to this topic.
No replies to this topic

#1 fanaticbooks

 
fanaticbooks

    HadIt.com Elder

  • Content Contributor
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 515 posts
 

Posted 28 November 2010 - 04:31 PM

NOTE: Go to pinned topic, this forum, for index of all letters available.

Attached File  VA Fast Letter 06-28.pdf   76.81KB   17 downloads


DEPARTMENT OF VETERANS AFFAIRS

Veterans Benefits Administration

Washington, D.C. 20420



December 22, 2006



Director (00/21)

All VA Regional Offices and Centers



In Reply Refer To: 211A

Fast Letter 06-28



SUBJ: Hartness v. Nicholson



This letter contains guidance for adjudicating special monthly pension (SMP) cases where the veteran is 65 years of age or older.





Background



On July 21, 2006, the U.S. Court of Appeals for Veterans Claims (CAVC) issued a decision in the case of Hartness v. Nicholson (2006). The veteran had been found entitled to non-serviceconnected disability pension benefits under the provisions of title 38 U.S.C. 1513(a) based on being over age 65. He subsequently submitted a private medical report in support of a claim for SMP. He was determined to be 70 percent disabled due to loss of vision and entitlement to SMP was denied. The CAVC reversed a May 2004 Board decision affirming the denial and remanded the matter to the Board.



The CAVC determined that the Board erred because it failed to apply section 1513(a) when considering whether Mr. Hartness was entitled to SMP under title 38 U.S.C. 1521(e). The CAVC held that "application of section 1513(a) results in the exclusion of the permanent-and-totaldisability requirement in section 1521(a) and (e) when considering whether a veteran 65 years of age or older is entitled to non-service-connected disability pension." The CAVC interpreted section 1513(a) as requiring an award of SMP to a wartime veteran "if, in addition to being at least 65 years old, he or she possesses a minimum disability rating of 60 percent or is considered permanently housebound as defined under 38 U.S.C. 1502."




Advertise Here

 




Advertise Here