10 Biggest VA Rating Errors

When veterans file disability claims, the Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) is supposed to apply its own rules consistently and fairly. In reality, VA raters often make the same mistakes over and over again. These errors delay benefits, lower disability ratings, and create unnecessary stress. For pilots, the stakes are even higher. A flawed VA rating doesn’t just affect your back pay. It can spill into your FAA medical record and threaten your flight status.

After reviewing hundreds of VA decision letters, the same patterns keep showing up. This two-part series breaks down the 10 most common VA rating errors. In Part 1, we’ll cover the first five — the ones we see most often and the ones that hit veterans hardest.

1. Denials for Missed C&P Exams

One of the most common errors is a flat-out denial when a veteran misses a Compensation & Pension (C&P) exam. VA raters treat a missed exam as if the claim is dead in the water. That’s not what the law says.

Under 38 C.F.R. § 3.655, if a claimant misses an exam, the VA must rate the claim “based on the evidence of record.” Denial is not automatic.

So why does this happen? Because VA raters rely heavily on C&P exams to justify decisions. If you decline the exam, they claim they have “no evidence.” But if you already submitted a private Disability Benefit Questionnaire (DBQ), treatment records, or lay statements, the VA is legally required to weigh that evidence.

As discussed here (VA C&P Exams Risky for Pilots – Putting your FAA medical at risk) for pilots, the risk of attending a C&P exam is obvious. Examiners can — and often do — add diagnoses you never claimed, sometimes based on one vague answer to a checklist question. Those diagnoses then become part of both your VA and FAA records. Once they’re in there, you can’t control how they’re interpreted.

Bottom line: The VA must rate based on the record. If they deny because you missed an exam, they’ve broken their own rule.

2. Discounting Private DBQs

The Disability Benefit Questionnaire (DBQ) is the backbone of the VA rating system. DBQs are standardized forms that walk through each condition using the VA’s own rating criteria. VA examiners or private providers can fill them out.

By regulation, there’s no difference. A DBQ completed by your private doctor should be considered equivalent to one completed by a VA contractor. Yet over and over, we see raters discount private DBQs with phrases like “not sufficient” or “lacks probative value.”

This isn’t just frustrating — it’s against VA’s own policies. 38 C.F.R. § 4.2 requires that “if the findings do not support a diagnosis…it must be returned for clarification.” This means the VA is required to contact the signing provider and ask for clarification. The solution isn’t to ignore the DBQ. It’s to reconcile the evidence with the rest of the record using the medical professional who signed the form.

For pilots, this mistake is especially damaging. Private DBQs are the safest way to document a condition without opening the door to a risky C&P exam. When raters refuse to give them weight, they undermine both the VA’s rules and the careful strategy pilots use to protect their FAA certificates.

Bottom line: Private DBQs count. When the VA ignores them, it’s not just unfair. It’s unlawful.

3. Misusing the “100-Mile Rule”

Here’s one of the most baffling trends: raters dismiss private DBQs because the doctor was more than 100 miles away. We’ve seen decision letters where the VA flatly states that a DBQ from a provider 1,500 miles away carries no weight.

There is no such rule. None. The so-called “100-mile rule” does not appear in VA law or regulation as a limit on evidence. It’s a creation of rater convenience.

The only place “100 miles” shows up is in VA’s internal scheduling policy. The M21-1 Adjudication Procedures Manual instructs VA to schedule C&P exams at a facility “within 100 miles of the veteran’s residence” whenever possible. If that’s not feasible, VA must authorize travel or arrange another accommodation. This rule exists to prevent the VA from forcing a veteran to travel unreasonable distances for a government-ordered exam.

It has nothing to do with the validity of medical evidence. A DBQ from your chosen doctor is acceptable no matter where that provider practices. The actual regulation that covers missed exams — 38 C.F.R. § 3.655 — has nothing to do with geography. It simply says that if you fail to report for an exam without good cause, the claim must be rated on the existing evidence. It does not say “ignore DBQs if the doctor is too far away.”

This error hits pilots especially hard. Many aviators see out-of-state specialists for orthopedic surgery, neurology, or sleep medicine. These doctors are often the best-qualified to complete a DBQ. To throw out their evidence just because of mileage is absurd — and unlawful.

Bottom line: The “100-mile rule” applies only to scheduling C&P exams. It has no bearing on whether private DBQs are valid. If a rater uses it to discount evidence, the decision is flawed on its face.

4. Ignoring Continuity of Symptoms

Not every condition is neatly documented in service treatment records. That doesn’t mean it isn’t service-connected. VA law recognizes this. Under 38 C.F.R. § 3.303(b), chronic conditions can be service-connected if symptoms have continued since discharge.

Evidence of continuity can include:

Veteran statements
Buddy letters
Spouse or family testimony
Civilian treatment records

Despite this, raters routinely deny claims by pointing to “gaps in care.” They’ll argue, “You didn’t see a doctor every year, so your symptoms must not be real.” That ignores the regulation entirely.

In reality, many veterans tough it out or self-manage rather than seeking medical attention at the clinic. A pilot with back pain, for example, may avoid treatment because they’re more focused on the mission than the pain. That doesn’t mean the pain went away.

Bottom line: Lay evidence of ongoing symptoms counts. Denying a claim because of a treatment gap breaks 38 C.F.R. § 3.303(b).

5. Overlooking Favorable Findings (and Ignoring Nexus Statements)

Perhaps the most frustrating error is when VA raters acknowledge favorable findings — then ignore them when deciding the claim.

Example: A decision letter might state, “Service records show injury in 2003. Current diagnosis confirmed by private provider.” Then, two sentences later: “Service connection is denied because no link is established.”

This makes no sense. The third element of service connection — the nexus — is often right there in the record. DBQs that address medical nexus statements can serve the same purpose. VA law says those opinions must be weighed. Ignoring them violates 38 C.F.R. § 3.303, 38 C.F.R. § 4.2, and the benefit of the doubt rule in 38 U.S.C. § 5107(b).

Under the Appeals Modernization Act, favorable findings are supposed to carry forward. Once the VA concedes diagnosis and in-service event, ignoring the embedded nexus opinion is not just sloppy — it’s unlawful.

For veterans, this creates an impossible standard. For pilots, it’s even worse — because the diagnosis and service injury still go into the record, even if VA refuses to connect them. That can complicate FAA medical reviews and threaten flight status.

Bottom line: When VA ignores nexus opinions, they aren’t just missing evidence. They’re breaking the rules that govern how service connection is decided.

Why These Errors Matter

Each of these five errors has real-world consequences. Veterans lose years of back pay. Claims get pushed into endless appeals. For pilots, there’s an extra layer of risk: every unnecessary diagnosis or denied claim can bleed into FAA medical records and complicate flight status.

The VA appeals process exists for a reason. Higher-Level Reviews (HLRs) often correct these errors once they’re pointed out. But the fact that they’re so common is the real problem. Veterans shouldn’t have to fight the same battles over and over.

This is just the first half of the picture. In Part 2, we’ll cover five more errors that show up constantly in VA decision letters:

Misapplying the PACT Act — denying presumptive conditions like rhinitis and sinusitis even when toxic exposure is conceded.
Setting the wrong effective date — ignoring Intent to File rules or law-change dates and cutting veterans out of years of back pay.
Ignoring residuals — dismissing scars, fissures, callosities, or nerve damage once the primary condition is denied, even though residuals are independently ratable.
Fragmenting conditions — splitting a single disability (like a shoulder injury) into multiple denials instead of rating the overall impairment.
Overlooking flare-ups — rating based only on “good days” instead of worst days, despite case law requiring flare-ups to be considered.

Just like ignoring embedded nexus statements, these mistakes reflect a deeper problem: raters aren’t applying their own rules.

Understanding these errors is the first step to protecting both your benefits and your flight status. The more you know about how VA raters get it wrong, the better prepared you’ll be to set it right.