2NDMARDIVDOC

thanks Bronco.

If I have to refill the CUE will it have to through a lengthy appeal or can I do something like a FDC on it?

Berta, I will do my best to answer your questions. The re-open and CUE were filed at the same time on the same piece of paper. I cannot attach the re-open decision because I don't have it yet. I just found out the condition was granted an hour ago. It was awarded at 60%. The CUE would have taken it back to Dec of 2001. I filed the re-open / CUE on Nov 10th 2016. The effective date of the award is the November date. There is no mention whatsoever on ebenefits regarding the status of the CUE. hopefully that clarifies my post. Do you think the CUE is dead or could it still be granted even though the claim is now listed as closed?

So just moments ago I found out I was awarded my claim. The effective date however is 11-10-16 I had filed a re-open / CUE on that condition that should have taken it back to 2001. I am seeing the effective date on ebenefits disability summery page. Is there still a chance that the CUE retro money is still alive out there somewhere or do you think I was only awarded back to November of last year when I re-filed the claim??

So as many of you know who's been following my posts, I have a high dollar claim in processing. Today I see that it is "prep for notification" It's been along time coming. Back in 01 when I discharged I filed for several conditions including a diagnosed case of overactive bladder. Some of the items were granted and some denied. The bladder condition was denied. I was still very green to the claims process back then and as a result, I didn't do a NOD on the bladder, I just accepted the denial. The thing is, while I was in service, I was diagnosed by a Urologist with overactive bladder and was placed on meds. I went through several diagnostic studies to see if it was a symptom of something else and nothing was found. Therefore the overactive bladder was considered the diagnoses and coded as such. I was placed on meds and that was the end of it. On my denial letter for the bladder the rater noted the diagnosed condition, recognized the need for meds and noted that there was no underlying cause of the condition. To the best of my memory I was never even given a C&P exam for the claimed condition, just a flat out denial. The confusing thing about the denial is that even though the rater recognized all those things I just mentioned, they never mentioned any evidence to the contrary and said that the "preponderance of evidence wasn't in my favor" So fast forward to November of 2016, I was talking to a DAV rep about it and he felt pretty strongly that a CUE had occurred. Especially since I still suffer from the condition and still take meds. He suggested I gather all my records both current and service and file a re-open / CUE. So that's what I did. I filed FDC for the bladder. I included all my medical notes as well as a couple nexus letters from different Dr's. I was scheduled for a C&P in January of this year. The exam went very much in my favor to the tune of a 60% rating according to the DBQ and the examiner provided a medical opinion that the current condition is the same as the one I claimed back in 01 based on my SMR's. A week or so later, the RO requested another medical opinion as to weather or not the overactive bladder was a symptom or actual diagnoses. I was pissed because they already had that info in triplicate. Anyway, the 2nd MO came back as noting the condition was the primary diagnoses and was NOT a symptom of anything else and again stated that it was the same condition as claimed in service back in 01. So do you guys and ladies think based on what I've told you here that a CUE occurred and do you think I should be expecting a retro payment?

Berta, I agree with you but what I am trying to explain here is that the mountain of evidence I have provided, including the opinion of the CP examiner if that it is NOT a secondary condition, it is the PRIMARY condition. I have had multiple diagnostic testing to see if it is being caused by something else and every test I've had is normal. Every doctor that ever been involved has documented that it is NOT related to anything else. The VA has all of this evidence already. Why would they be asking for something that already have in duplicate?

Many of you have seen my prior posts regarding my "bladder condition" claim. Here is the latest news. Please tell me your thoughts. The brief history is that in November of 2016 my VSO filed a CUE / re-open on a bladder claim that was denied back in 02. The original claim showed a condition that was diagnosed in service as "overactive bladder" what's important to understand here is that the overactive bladder WAS NOT LINKED TO ANY OTHER CONDITION. It was a stand alone diagnosis. I was treated in service and placed on meds. The original denial stated that the " preponderance evidence was not in my favor" Please also know that there was absolutely no conflicting evidence or opinion to that diagnoses, and to the best of my memory, I was never given a CP exam for that claimed condition back in 02. I never filed a NOD on that denial because at that time, I didn't know any better. Fast forward to November of 2016, my VSO filed the CUE / re-open with new and material evidence. I was scheduled for a CP exam for the overactive bladder and it was scored VERY much in my favor. The examiner confirmed the diagnoses of "overactive bladder" She also linked it to an in-service condition based on the military medical records I provided. I also submitted another nexus letter form a different doctor stating the same thing. Every single doctor, including my urologists have documented the diagnoses as "overactive bladder" I received a notice the other day that the claim had been deferred for a medical opinion. I inquired through the IRIS system and the response I received was that the rater wanted clarification from the examiner as to whether the overactive bladder was a primary condition or a symptom of something else. Right about then is where I totally lost it. Like I said, EVERY SINGLE DOCUMENT I PROVIDED THE VA STATED IT WAS A PRIMARY DIAGNOSES AS WELL AS THE C&P EXAMINER'S REPORT STATING THE EXACT SAME THING. What are they trying to do to me?? Why are they not using the evidence that is right in front of them including their own damn examiners diagnoses? Any thoughts, advice etc. would be greatly appreciated.

this is really getting old. So my bladder condition I found out was deferred for a "medical opinion" based on the inquiry system that I sent my deferred question to today. I really need help understanding this! My CP exam was totally in my favor and the examiner gave her opinion as being "more likely than not" I also provided 2 different nexus statements from doctors saying the same thing. I also provided my military medical records showing treatment in service for the condition as well as current records... what in the hell could they possibly be looking for another medical opinion for?

Thanks Berta. I looked further into the deferred item and on ebenefits there is a tab that says "needed from others" I clicked on it and all it says <VA medical center> That's it, nothing else.... The laughable part is that below that, it says that I can provide the requested documents to speed the process up..... There is NOTHING that shows what they are even asking for? How can I provide something when they aren't saying what it is??? All that's there is <VA medical center> I've already had a C&P exam which like I said was very much in my favor and 2 nexus letters from different Doctors stating it was present in my active duty and military medical records to prove it. Im totally lost as to what they could be asking for in addition to what I've already submitted??

Thanks Bronco.

So I find out today that my claim has a deferred item. I filed for a bladder condition and shoulder condition. My shoulder was granted 20% and my bladder issue was deferred. I really don't understand that. I submitted a ton of evidence as well as 2 nexus letters from 2 different doctors. My bladder CP exam was very much in my favor. The examiner also opined that the bladder was service connected. The only hiccup is that the bladder claim was filed as a reopen / CUE from a denial back in 02. Could a large retro be holding it up? Any thoughts?

Thank you

My claim has been sitting in the preparation for decision for 30 days now. My patience is wearing thin. I provided very clear evidence and my CP exams were pretty strongly in my favor. What the heck are they waiting on? I only claimed 2 conditions. One of them has the potential to have a lot of retro... a lot. Could that be the hold up? If the retro was awarded woul this be the stage it gets stalled in?

Bronco, based on what you read on my denial for the bladder condition and what I've said about it in my posts, do you see a possible CUE?

Thanks hamslice.