Jump to content
VA Disability Community via Hadit.com

VA Disability Claims Articles

Ask Your VA Claims Question | Current Forum Posts Search | Rules | View All Forums
VA Disability Articles | Chats and Other Events | Donate | Blogs | New Users

  • hohomepage-banner-2024-2.png

  • 27-year-anniversary-leaderboard.png

    advice-disclaimer.jpg

  • donate-be-a-hero.png

  • 0

Should I Reopen This Claim

Rate this question


CITY BOY

Question

I filed a claim in 1985 for a unspecified genitourinary condition, which got denied. I did not file an appeal back then because, I did not want to go thru the horrible testing again to gain evidence. In the year 2000 I filed again thru the American Legion to reopen the claim for the 1985 condition, and the V.A. found that I did not file adequate New and Material evidence to reopen the claim. So, I went back to the drawing board and found that I was diagnosed with Chronic Prostatitis in the Marines, in my service medical file. So, the American Legion filed for the new condition and I received a 10% compensation for the Prostatitis condition. Well, just recently in january 2009 I had Chronic Prostatitis upgraded to 20% and they also found a Urethal Bulbar Stricture while testing me within my groin and the V.A. doctor said that the Chronic Prostatitis and the Urethal Bulbar Stricture is definetly connected back to when I was in the service. My question is can I reopen the 1985 claim for the Urethal Bulbar Stricture as the unspecified genitourinary condition as new and material evidence? Please help, otherwise I will open as new claim. Thanx

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Answers 23
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters For This Question

Recommended Posts

I think the basis for the CUE might be in their using the wrong diagnostic code (and rating)in the 1985 claim.

You could claim CUE and state that the "clear and undisputed evidence of record warranted a proper rating."

and then cite Myler V Derwinski.(1996)

I wonder if this was denied under the 'not well grounded BS' the VA used to deny claims with.

What was the date of the 2000 claim?

It is possible (since the VCAA became law in 2000) that the VA failed to provide you with a VCAA letter at that time.

You can re-open the claim but your EED will be the day you re=open it formally.

However if you file a CUE on the older decision and you are successful- the EED will go back to the older claim date.

I wonder-did you even get a C & P exam when you filed this earlier claim?

Myler----CAVC award of CUE.

The veteran had sustained through and through gunshot wound to arm.

I think this was a clean wound with no major scarring.

He got "0"% SC.

The VA kept saying there was no involvement of Muscle group XIII warranting a percentage that rose to "at least a moderate degree" of disability.

The vet won via the CAVC. I think they only awarded him 10% for this GSW but the 10% retro went back to

1953!!!!

But this is a good reason we should make sure we have copies of the SMRs, copies of all our med recs and state an exact diagnosis in medical terms when we file our claims.

Per the Federal Circuit court (Moody V. Principi) the VA has " a duty to fully and sympathetically develop a veteran's claim to it's optimum." meaning to determine all potential claims.

Even if the claim contains a diagnosis that is vaque-had the VA fully developed the earlier claim maybe someone would have realised that this was in fact a claim involving chrionic prostatitus and even that there was a secondary condition as well.

I too am curious what that older denial said.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I think the basis for the CUE might be in their using the wrong diagnostic code (and rating)in the 1985 claim.

You could claim CUE and state that the "clear and undisputed evidence of record warranted a proper rating."

and then cite Myler V Derwinski.(1996)

I wonder if this was denied under the 'not well grounded BS' the VA used to deny claims with.

What was the date of the 2000 claim?

It is possible (since the VCAA became law in 2000) that the VA failed to provide you with a VCAA letter at that time.

You can re-open the claim but your EED will be the day you re=open it formally.

However if you file a CUE on the older decision and you are successful- the EED will go back to the older claim date.

I wonder-did you even get a C & P exam when you filed this earlier claim?

Myler----CAVC award of CUE.

The veteran had sustained through and through gunshot wound to arm.

I think this was a clean wound with no major scarring.

He got "0"% SC.

The VA kept saying there was no involvement of Muscle group XIII warranting a percentage that rose to "at least a moderate degree" of disability.

The vet won via the CAVC. I think they only awarded him 10% for this GSW but the 10% retro went back to

1953!!!!

But this is a good reason we should make sure we have copies of the SMRs, copies of all our med recs and state an exact diagnosis in medical terms when we file our claims.

Per the Federal Circuit court (Moody V. Principi) the VA has " a duty to fully and sympathetically develop a veteran's claim to it's optimum." meaning to determine all potential claims.

Even if the claim contains a diagnosis that is vaque-had the VA fully developed the earlier claim maybe someone would have realised that this was in fact a claim involving chrionic prostatitus and even that there was a secondary condition as well.

I too am curious what that older denial said.

The date of the rating decision was 10/12/2000 thru American Legion Boston Masschusetts for an uspecified genitourinary contition. And a quick note the VA decision says that they did not find no residuals on sep[aration exam. It clearly states that I was diagnosed with Chronic Prostratitis as a result of everything documented, on Separation exam. On Monday I am going to the DAV and try to find the decision and the evidence from back in 1984 , and will let you know then.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I think the basis for the CUE might be in their using the wrong diagnostic code (and rating)in the 1985 claim.

You could claim CUE and state that the "clear and undisputed evidence of record warranted a proper rating."

and then cite Myler V Derwinski.(1996)

I wonder if this was denied under the 'not well grounded BS' the VA used to deny claims with.

What was the date of the 2000 claim?

It is possible (since the VCAA became law in 2000) that the VA failed to provide you with a VCAA letter at that time.

You can re-open the claim but your EED will be the day you re=open it formally.

However if you file a CUE on the older decision and you are successful- the EED will go back to the older claim date.

I wonder-did you even get a C & P exam when you filed this earlier claim?

Myler----CAVC award of CUE.

The veteran had sustained through and through gunshot wound to arm.

I think this was a clean wound with no major scarring.

He got "0"% SC.

The VA kept saying there was no involvement of Muscle group XIII warranting a percentage that rose to "at least a moderate degree" of disability.

The vet won via the CAVC. I think they only awarded him 10% for this GSW but the 10% retro went back to

1953!!!!

But this is a good reason we should make sure we have copies of the SMRs, copies of all our med recs and state an exact diagnosis in medical terms when we file our claims.

Per the Federal Circuit court (Moody V. Principi) the VA has " a duty to fully and sympathetically develop a veteran's claim to it's optimum." meaning to determine all potential claims.

Even if the claim contains a diagnosis that is vaque-had the VA fully developed the earlier claim maybe someone would have realised that this was in fact a claim involving chrionic prostatitus and even that there was a secondary condition as well.

I too am curious what that older denial said.

I went to the DAV today monday the 3rd of August and they agree that I have a monster CUE against the VA possibly back to service, because I applied a year after I got out of service. The DAV is waiting on my C-file to get back from the VAMC next week due to C+P exams this week. So as of next week I will know why they actually denied me in 1985. Thank you everyone for the help.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Let us know what else the DAV says on this.

"Copies of Service Medical Records from November 1978 thru Apr 1983 submitted by the veteran relate to treament for a non-specific urethritis and reference prostatitis.

After all was said and done they gave me connection for Chronic Prostatitis in

April 2002 10%. My SMR clearly states Chronic Protratitis and urethritis all over the place, hard to miss."

Did you specifically claim prostratitis in the 1985 claim?

I am wondering something else-along with CUE-

was the treatment from VA for the unspecified genitourinary condition the same treatment as it would have been for the Prostate problem?

So I guess I wonder if the VA misdiagnosed you until they finally diagnosed and treated the prostatitus?

If so you could file a Section 1151 claim too.

If the VA fails to adequately and properly diagnose and treat a disability- and if their negligence results in more disability- the VA will rate the additional disabling affects "as if" service connected under Section 1151, 38 USC.

This is something else the DAV might want to consider along with the CUE claim.

No one is limited to one single scenario to gain proper comp.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Let us know what else the DAV says on this.

"Copies of Service Medical Records from November 1978 thru Apr 1983 submitted by the veteran relate to treament for a non-specific urethritis and reference prostatitis.

After all was said and done they gave me connection for Chronic Prostatitis in

April 2002 10%. My SMR clearly states Chronic Protratitis and urethritis all over the place, hard to miss."

Did you specifically claim prostratitis in the 1985 claim?

I am wondering something else-along with CUE-

was the treatment from VA for the unspecified genitourinary condition the same treatment as it would have been for the Prostate problem?

So I guess I wonder if the VA misdiagnosed you until they finally diagnosed and treated the prostatitus?

If so you could file a Section 1151 claim too.

If the VA fails to adequately and properly diagnose and treat a disability- and if their negligence results in more disability- the VA will rate the additional disabling affects "as if" service connected under Section 1151, 38 USC.

This is something else the DAV might want to consider along with the CUE claim.

No one is limited to one single scenario to gain proper comp.

Berta the condition that was claimed, I believe was an unspecified genitourniary condition, which the American Legion processed for me. I believe that the same testing is involved when looking for either condition, because they still do the same tests. I can't wait till I look at the 1985 decision when I go back to the DAV the end of next week, when the c-file will be back from the VAMC. I have another C+P exam for the bulbar urethral stricture that they just found {this coming Saturday} when they upgraded my Chronic Prostratitis to 20%. The VA Doctor said, that both the conditions are connected to the service, from the date that I started to complain about pain and symptoms. So, now there is two different conditions that are connected to the service. The problems I complained about are the same symptoms as 1985.

Also I will mention the 1151 and see if there is any thing we can connect to this. Thanks. I'll keep everyone informed.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I just wanted to keep everybody updated. Well, the DAV got back in touch with me and told me that they tried to get the C-file from the VA, but was in the hands of the rater. So, the DAV is waiting till they are done rating my appeals and will look at the rating decision for possible CUE ( 1985 decision) when the VA is done. Looking at the end of August 2009.

So, I started to look around for the Chronic prostatitis decision of April 2 2002 where they approved my condition for 10%. I found that in this decision that the VA did reopen the claim of unspecified genitourinary condition (As Chronic Prostratisis) which I was denied for reopening (the 1985 claim)on October 12 2000 (because of no new and material evidence). The VA reopened the claim as new and material evidence because I clearly pointed out in several areas, the Chronic Prostrate problems were diganosed in SMR, in service and at the separation examination. Which should of been clearly noticed in 1985.

My question now is if the VA gave me the decision based on new and material evidence and payed me back to the date I tried to reopen the 1985 claim for unspecified genitourinary conditon, why did they not open the claim in 2000 for me?

The condition was stated clearly in the SMR in 1985, 2000, 2002, and still to this day has not changed. So if they reopened a claim and payed me from April 2002 back to June 2000 does that take away my possible CUE in the 1985 decision?

I hope I explained myself well. Not feeling to good today. Thanks. If you need anymore info, Please ask.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

Guidelines and Terms of Use