john999

Bronco In my CUE claim the medical report that the VA excluded said I was unable to work. If that is not an informal claim for TDIU I don't know what is, but since the RO excluded that information it was never considered. If the VA has two medical reports one which is favorable to the vet and one which is unfavorable, and the VA can simply exclude the favorable report then no vet can get due process. That is one aspect of my CUE. They just &^%$ all over me back in the day and did not even include appeal rights. The BVA wants to use the dictionary definition of "undebatable" but that is not the VA's meaning according to case law. In legal lala land every one has a debatable meaning.

I would like to see where VA has inferred a potential right to SMC "S" for any 100% mentally disabled vet. Do they discuss in anyone's claim here that they considered "S" for 100% vet?

Berta It seems if they admit they did not consider all the evidence that was before them, especially a doctor's report, that would be automatic CUE, but not in the "reasonable minds" of BVA. My lawyer pointed out the word as used by the BVA "undebatable" would make any CUE moot. Every argument or piece of evidence is debatable. It takes a "reasonable mind" to determine what that means. I like the case where BVA argued that just because there was falsified evidence in a vet's file that the RO could have come to a fair decision anyway, and that the vet could not prove that the falsified evidence influenced the decision. That is an impossible standard. This makes me think every vet who has basis of a CUE should hire a lawyer and take it all the way. I am not able to do the kind of research to argue my CUE the way it should have been argued back in 2006, but even if I did the VA would have denied it due to 30 years of retro at possible 100% level. It does not take a genious to look at a decision and see something is missing, but it takes a pro to argue it all the way up the line without making a mistake that can kill your claim. I think decisions from 60's, 70's should all be looked at for errors. My rating decision was two pages and I did not even get appeal rights.

The "S" award should be retro to the date you first met the total plus 60%. I claimed "S" in 2010 and got it retro to 2008 when I went to TDIU+ 60%. I know there is a question about if I had been total+ 60% in 2005 would I have got retro to 2005? I think I should since no new law was written only reinterpretation of old law. If VA is going to say that any vet who can make it to appointments is not HB then someone should sue them for not providing complete home care for every single one of those vets. If we are housebound the VA should be sending doctors and portable MRI and CT machine to our houses if this is the standard they set. I should have a nurse living with us to help me onto the toilet.

I must have dyslexia. My claim is not that big a deal except to me. It does show how the VA uses certain key concepts to deny CUE claims. "Reasonable minds" means their minds. "Undebatable" means they could debate the number of angels on the head of a pin. If your CUE even hints at "reweighing the evidence" that is basis for them to dismiss it. It is easy for an inexperienced vet or VSO to make a mistake like that, so get a lawyer who understands these legal concepts.

Hire a lawyer! I don't think the VA will roll over on 32 years of potential retro without a fight. If it gets to CAVC they will have a lawyer writing a 25 page brief explaining to other lawyers why you have no claim. You don't get much respect among a group of lawyers if you are not of one them. They think all vets are dumb, otherwise you would be a lawyer too.

My docket numer is 10-8234. You have to go to the website for the court. Then you look for case information. What they do is to run a listing of where your claim is at in the process. My lawyer submitted our brief. It has been at the court for about 8 months. It is in the VA's side of the tennis court now. They have to submit their brief which they have 60 days to do plus inevitable extensions. Just google "court of veteran appeals". It asks for the name of the party or lawyer. The court seems pretty efficient. They do have deadlines for things like briefs. The bad part is they remand many of the claims back to BVA. The lawyers argue every single significant concept or word in a decision. Nothing is in cement. The word "undebatable" is what the VA is using to try and crush my CUE. There is no way in the world the BVA is an honest broker. They are biased, no question.

VA has been telling me for years they want to "own" my health care. This is a joke since much of the system is almost impossible to access.

Pete I would try to CUE it. As I understand it Bradley is not a new law or regulation, but is the proper interpretation of an existing law or regulation. The VA was improperly not awarding HB to vets who were total plus 60% all along.

You know I had a bump on my leg . I had the VA do a CT scan on it. They found no problem but found problems with blockage in veins and arteries in my leg. Due to this CT I filed for artery disease which somehow ended up as heart disease. No one at the VA ever told me I had a problem except what I read in the radiologist report. I found that this is a common secondary condition to my DMII. I got this from VBM. I filed for it and got 0% then appealed and got 60%. Get VA to do CT scan on your leg or legs. That is where future heart problems often begin to show up. If there is calcification in your leg vein and arteries you have a problem you probably are not even aware of now. VA and other medical types wait until you have a heart attack before starting any treatment to prevent the future problems.

I don't think it would hurt to see your congressman. Your claim is going nowhere so you don't have to worry about slowing it down at this point. Bring your proofs to the congressman (not a hundred pages) and sign the release for the congressman to get access to your records. When you call the 800 number I would not trust anything they say. You could send an IRIS inquiry, but that is not always good either. Tell the congress assistant or congressman that your claim was sent in a year ago and since that time you have gotten conflicting information about it. A year is just not that long to wait, but your claim is probably sitting at the bottom of a pile.

Look under case information. You click on case information and then on case docket report. I am in there in the more recent cases under John T. King.

Karl Kazmierzak is my lawyer. He takes the most difficult cases. I think he is on a learning curve but he does give it his all in my opinion. You see with all these lawyers they do this work on contingency basis. They don't get paid for doing a writ which is outside the usual RO/BVA/Court route. Tell him you will pay for the writ.

I think the only time the VA really looks into your C-File is when you raise an issue that goes back a ways and could cost them some money. I got my C-file and it was full of excess copies. I did find an issue that launched me on my CUE claim going back to 1971. The first claim I ever filed had been turned into &#@$ because the VA did some editing and excluding of evidence. Read your c-file decisions and ratings. You may find some major errors.

If you want some insight into what goes into a CUE claim at the Court of Vet Appeals that has been all the way from the RO/BVA/Court you can look at my CUE which is recent by going to the Court's website and look under King, john. Then find John T. King #10-8234. This is what a lawyer can do for you. This is a very old claim I CUE'ed. The army threw me out when I was very sick and on anti-psychotic medications. This was just to save a buck and they threw me to the dogs. The VA also denied me my due process. I don't even know if I will win and what winning may mean. This is why you should hire a lawyer when you have one of these potentially rich retro claims. My lawyer did follow this CUE all the way from the RO.

Papa I think you would qualify for medicare if you are disabled and under 65. Medicare is a good thing. I am not sure about that but it is worth checking.

No, but if they make it any more trouble to get appointments I may just not even go anymore except for PCP. I have no parking at my VAMC. I must take a shuttle bus from remote parking rain or shine.

I have been through the same kinds of things where some doctor said I was faking because I had degree in psychology. I went all the way to the BVA with that and got a new C&P. This took years. I would get an IMO to rebutt this. If you only appeal it you will probably get a remand and another C&P. I would ask for the DRO Hearing and present new evidence of your unemployablility. Get a strong IMO and get a hearing. Some of these VA pimps just throw in these opinions about vets faking this or that. It is the kiss of death unless you get some new evidence to rebutt it.

Yes, but you must be on frequent bed rest and doctors don't prescribe bed rest of back and neck injuries these days. They want you out of bed even after fusions and major repairs. Mine told me after a cervical fusion to walk as much as possible.

I read "Cushman v Shensiki" 2008-9. This guy seems to have won his cue because the VA included forged documents in his records that resulted in his denial. The guy has been fighting this case for at least a couple of decades. It is similar to my case because the facts that should have been before the RO were not there. His case was remanded back to the BVA which has denied him before. When you get your claim denied by the BVA don't give up because if they can deny a claim with forged documents they can deny anything. He wanted his denial reversed but it was only remanded. How can a vet get a fair hearing if his records are altered and forged? Is there any question this is a CUE. The BVA claimed that even though there were forged records in his file the VA may have based their decision on the non-altered records. What logic? Where are reasonalbe minds? You can look up my claim at the court under John T. King 10-3248. This was a decision in 1973 when I was a basket case. I got 10% because the VA excluded my doctor's report from the decision and relied completely on a VA doctor's notes. The BVA admits my doctor's report was excluded but they say NO CUE because my evidence is not "undebateable". I am 100% better than I was then and I have been TDIU for ten years.

So far I get check-ups twice a year with my PCP and about 4 trips to the VA shrink and an annual eye exam. Dental once every two years which is piss poor and below standard for any private dentist in the world. I just use the VA to check in and complain about pain and depression. I want to keep getting my drugs with no co-pays since that would cost me. I really hate the VA. The access problem is not getting better and there are more and more very sick, older vets who make me look like the picture of health. I am almost ashamed to even ask for help from a system geared to charity cases. Really it feels like welfare. The hospital seems dirty. I buy my own glasses and will go to my own dentist after using the half-ass VAMC. They really treat us like dirt in Tampa.

Brokensoldier I see your point and agree that the lawyer gets paid. However, is it worth the preperation the lawyer does in research, writing briefs and arguing the case if he thinks he will lose the case? How well does the government pay if their is no retro to divide?

I was looking to see if any action had happened lately on my case at the Court of Vet Appeals. I saw that my lawyer is doing a case for a male vet who claims he was raped by his 1st Sgt. in 1969. The BVA denied his claim for PTSD in 2003 saying they only had his word for this MST. It is an interesting and shocking case. My lawyer is Karl Kazmierzak. It seems the rape ruined this kid's life and now he is an older man and still suffering. The victim says he was threatened if he did not keep his mouth shut. He claims the Sgt got him drunk at his house and then attacked him. His parents did say there was a drastic change in his behavior when he got out of the army. There are no SMR's to back up his claim. I wonder what his chances are? He has medical records from 2003 where he claims this happened to him. How do you win a claim almost 40 years after the fact based on only your word and the word of your parents? My lawyer took the case to court, so he must think there is a chance. I see the difficulty in MST if it is not reported and there is no medical exam.

Bob You can let it all hang out at your C&P. Tell them what it feels like to dream about running through a minefield.

If they are going to send him to Afghanistan with a pacemaker I think he should call his senator. Maybe if there is military lawyer he should consult with him. That is just my first impression, but if it was me I would be yelling and screaming before I let them send me to a combat zone with a pacemaker and a bad heart. Someone has lost their mind. I know others here probably have better ideas.