Mr cue

well here is my story did a cue claim of my 93 decision get to the bva they say there can not be a cue of a open claim. wow this mean t my case go back to 93. and i was granted 60% in 2001 for the same issue. they even open a infromal claim for 93 because comp exam 93 said i was not working. wow i was granted iu in 2001 .so my effective date is now 93 right. it not that easy with va bva reopen my claim granted me 10% 93-2001 and remaned the iu for a doc to say if i could work 93. this is all a error of the law igram vs nicholson.. they even send me a copy of the case. get a call from amc guy tell me they have to follow bva orders and there is nothing he could do. call bva and they say claim is with amc they can do anything this is bull . i won my case and they are still playing what can i do iam not paying a lawyer when bva must follow the law an they send me the court cases any one has contacts at bva who could help ith this

they dissmissed the cue because the claim is still open so my thing is if my claim was open and i was granted 60% same neck issue isnt my effective date now 93 and if they open a informal iu claim from 93 and i was granted iu 2001 is my effective date now 93 by law and igram cases. need phone number to someone in bva this is bull

well i have a case that goes back to 93 i did a cue claim got to bva and was told there can not be a cue of a open claim. they dissmised the cue and open my claim back to 93 and gave me a infromal iu claim 93 because i told the comp doc i was not working. now here were it gets funny i was granted 60% and iu 2001. the bva has remaned my iu cases to amc for doc opion. if i could have work in 93 i have not work since 93. and granted me 10% 93-2001 for the same issue. this a cue by bva. infromal claim was granted 2001 so by law and igrams vs nichloson and by this case and many others. and would you believe i can not get the bva or amc to look at this. i am just go threw motion.

not the best speller but i do no my claim did it all myself wrote and all if vso and va did something wro ng who do you tell.should i let vso no that i no she was not to quit like that. my claim is and ingram claim.

not going to put vso out there but my vso left me at my dro hearing atold they not with me any more 2008. this is put in va computor evrything i get from va say no vso. i call big vso in dc and was told they still are with me in there computors. and talk with head guy who say he would have to give ok for vso to quit. so he got to looking at my claim. so my thing is my claim go back to 93 va just did nothing with it.bva say it still open. this vso is in the same building as va. i was granted 100% 2001 and was told by both vso and va not to do a cue it would mess my 100% up. so i wait for that 5yr thing and did it vso quit. so this look to me like they all new in 2001 that they mess up. so how do i blow this up. it none right.

testvet i se it your way i do need a lawyer and have been talking to lawyer in dc i just got the big guy at vfw to take a look an he say they still have poa and i believe there in amc too so i will give him a month.with the congressman email to amc i will see if they get to moving. but its bull

well listen to this i post a while back that my vso quit me the day of my dro hearing on my cue claim. well my cue made it to the bva and they say my claim from 93 was still open and there can not be a cue of a open claim. hear where thing get crazy i was granted 60%iu 2001 ny vso was like dont do a cue or she would quit she in the va were they left my claim open at. so now my claim is at amc. i got my congressman he tell me to call the head vso in dc. talk to him he tell me they still have poa and a vso can not quit with out dc say so. so my cases is a Informal Claims: In http://' target="_blank">Ingram v. Nicholson, 21 Vet. App. 232 (2007) (Ingram II), the CAVC reconsidered its earlier decision in Ingram v. Nicholson, 20 Vet. App. 156 (2006) (Ingram I), in light of the Federal Circuit's decision in Deshotel v. Nicholson, 457 F.3d 1258 (Fed. Cir. 2006). Previously, in Ingram I, the CAVC had held that the Board erred by imposing a strict pleading requirement and by failing to take a sympathetic reading of the pro se claimant's filings. The CAVC held that a reasonably raised claim remains 'pending' until there is an explicit adjudication of the claim or an explicit adjudication of a subsequent claim for the same disability. In Deshotel v. Nicholson, 457 F.3d 1258 (Fed. Cir. 2006), however, the Federal Circuit had held that where the veteran files more than one claim with the RO at the same time, and the RO's decision acts (favorably or unfavorably) on one of the claims but fails to specifically address the other claim, the second claim is deemed denied, and the appeal period begins to run. The Federal Circuit rejected the theory that an implied claim remains pending and unadjudicated. Upon reconsideration sought by the Secretary in Ingram II, the CAVC rejected the Secretary's argument that Deshotel controlled and found that, if strictly applied, the general holding in Deshotel would produce nonsensical results. The CAVC reasoned that if a claim could be denied sub silentio by failing to be addressed by VA when deciding other contemporaneous claims, the veteran would have no reason to know that the claim had been decided. As such, the CAVC interpreted Deshotel to mean that an RO decision may only constitute an adjudication of a claim where the RO decision addresses the claim 'in a manner sufficient for a claimant to deduce that the claim was adjudicated. Consequently, the CAVC held that a reasonably raised claim remains pending 'until there is either recognition of the substance of the claim in an RO decision from which a claimant could deduce that the claim was adjudicated or an explicit adjudication of a subsequent 'claim' for the same disability. i was granted 60% 2001 for same issue 2001 but no check

ok i have a claim that was remaned to amc its been there since 1-10 and i have found that u cannot contact anyone there. the number i got from hadit posting are now not working. i just when to the bva homepage and there contact number are gone and now its just 1-800 . has any one called 1800 number. it say call back call volume are high. man i believe it is going to get really hard to get any thing done.

i think the place was made to do nothing but make claim process worst. you can not call them the bva say they dont have jurdstion over them. call 1800 number told they have to iris them what is that did iris with 1800 no resopnes in month. this seem crazy i no there are a lot of us in this boat. what can we do. look i have read that the address is i st not eye st as is on everthing they send. is it me or is this bull ro did a better job with your claim.

how many of us have claims at amc with no response. can we start action against the amc. this place is no help just holding pen.

i call bva they say that have no control over the amc call the 1800 number they say they can only iris amc so my quetion is who has control over them no one it not right.

i no there are many of us who have claims with amc well i do and have found that bva which sends the claim have no say once claim is there. they have not phone number call bva va and they dont respone to iris. ok how can this be part of va than if even bud osman can no get at them. i believe this is wrong i have read on heard that they have had claims for 3 years with out doing any thing that is bull the ro does take this long. i have a claim that was grant back to 93. it was send here and i was granted things by the bva. i got a little check and no letter. i believe so that i can miss date. i am now get a lawyer and i want to try to get all veteran to stay together on this. how can we fight them.

i would let the bva make the decision u can still waive the ro and amc consideration i did and the judge decide and still remaned it back to amc. this is there way of just keeping the wheel turn u could sit at amc for years and get denided then it go to the judge anyway wasted time to me.

well my case is just a person taking the time out and looking at it no i have not work since 94 all record even bva stated i have not work since 94 but remaned it to amc for a comp exam doc to tell if i could work in 94. i dont even have work credits for ssdi never got ssi. this is all part of my record. bva say that ro never send my claim to them in 94 that is why it is still open. so i believe and law say if a claim is over look and then granted the effective date is the date of the over look claim. and my claim was granted 2001. i ve case were this was done. i ve just say to my well u got this far by my self i had no vso. they quit me. so now i call people no help. just venting i am waiting for dc to open back. and i will play my last card before. send the lawyer the papers.

no i have been doing this all alone my rep quit me when i did the cue. she told me dont do it and all of this this is what make me not trust the one that are right in the va. if i had not did the cue i would have never found out that my claim from 94 was still open.so now i am looking for a 94 effective date for my 60% /iu that was granted 2001. if the claim was open when i was granted 60% iu than the effective date would be 94 and yes they are the same issue. from 94.but i get the run around they granted me 20% i had neck spasm in 94 i have them now .rating code 5293 is what i am rated. but i found a lawyer in dc was a rating person at amc so hope this works sign her all paper tommrow. what do u have to pay a lawyer any way i no part of retro but what %

well i got my back pay on bva it granted me 20% from 94-01 well this is bull i was 10% rated wrong did a cue was told my claim from 94 was still open well 2001 i was granted 60% iu for the same issue. my effective date should now be 94. o no the va likes to play game they send me to a doctor to tell if he think i could have work 94. all my records from comp exam 94- until tell that i was not working so tell me who a doc that has never seen me and did not have my records is to tell if i could work 94. i put in reconsidertion with bva. but i am making call to amc they tell they see what i am talking about. but bva has to handled that call bva they tell my claim is with amc and they cannot handle claims with amc. so now i believe i need a lawyer. i dont have any one with me on this and i believe this y i am getting all these games.so i am looking for a lawyer in dc i want him or her to be right there. mad as ---- that i will have to give so person some of retro and i did this claim my self to this point, but i hadit i have one more thing up my sleeve. i will tell if it works

man its been 30 day now and no letter or nothing my bother was granted benfits and he has rec his check what going here.

do u have a rating for any of these condtion or a claim in for any of them.

i am have a problem find cases or precedents. where a claim was won and then there was a cue and then there found that the orginal claim was still open and unadjudcated. so the effective date where the claim was won is now the original claim date. and its the same issue from the orginal claim. so lets see i got to have fun with this or i be just be sitting here upset with va games as most are. so lets have fun.

u get this 14 day letter which breaks down how much is owe for each year. i have even got this letter so i cant get a check until letter it been a month they send my file to amc to process lady call told me i should at least get the letter last week this is all games.listen they owe me.

i have posted about my case before .i got awared 20%-94-2001 on dec 17 do u no i have not got anything not even 14 day letter this crazy haqs anyone got there retro pay this year or am i just trippin. or does it seem va is dragging feet more these day i been deal with va for last 10Yr. i have got awards before never took this long to get that 14 day letter. what should i do

my cases is with bva i dont under stand if my neck claim was open 94 and 2001 i put in papers and was award 60% for my neck the effective date is 94. this is what that say happen i got 10%94 did nod ro never send my appeal to the board.2004 did cue this is when i find out that my claim was still open there can not be a cue of a open claim. so i am like wow this just like wining the cue. be cause now my effective date should be 94 right. yes my vso drop me when i did the cue didnt want me to do .i really believe in my heart. that she new they mess up that y 10%-60% iu come on.told me i took that and that would be it. so now every one like it a bva we cannot touch it. srew them any way i did this with help of hadit i will get lawyer if it go to court. dont see it going there. they hope i miss 120 day to do reconderation. and miss 7.45 am comp exam.i thing i can do a new claim at ro if this all fail. because now i am talk about some thing 94. i guess wish i had scanner so u can see the new bva decision its crazy. that should post it soon.

no vso want to help. not get lawyer to afer bva. you 120 dat to do the reonsideration was going to wait but they got me mad with all this play. man even put comp exam at 7.45am hat are thet hoping i miss it. got letter wed comp exam mon crazy.

This is my letter asking for reconsideration of my bva decision. First I would like to say that I believe my cases should be reconsider on the bases that my claim from 94 was for increase of the initial 10% give to me for my neck. I appeal and believe that since my claim was for and increase claim for my neck form 94 that was never adjucadated and I put in paper in 2001 which were treated as new material and I was granted 60% for my neck I believe my effective date should be 94. For my 60% rating I was rated under 5322 some one with a gunshot wound and I had no gun shot in 94. U have changed my rating code. Now to 5293 I don’t see how you can even say that I did not meet the requirements for a 60% rating under rating code 5293 in 94. A 60% rating is warranted when the intervertebral disc syndrome was pronounced with persistent symptoms compatible with sciatic neuropathy with characteristic pain and demonstrable muscle spasms, absent ankle jerk or other neurological findings appropriate to the site of the disk. I had neck spasm in 93 on med 200 report it tell of this all my records as u point out say that I had spasms in my neck. 94- until I had nothing but symptom that were compatible with sciatic neuropathy with pain u tell of all this and u even say that I had no neurological finding which is the last criteria for a 60% rating under 5293 I also believe there was a error of laws and regs. There must be a comparison between the level of severity and symptomatology of the claimant’s service-connected disability with the established criteria found in the rating schedule for that disability. Under the approach prescribed by the va if the criteria reasonably describe the claimants disability level and symptomatology, than the claimant disability picture is contemplated by the rating schedule the assigned scheduler evaluation is therefore adequate and no referral is required. I don’t see how this was over look and it even speaks of how marked interference with employment. Should be look at and I have not worked since services. Even when u take a look at if I should get extra-schedular rating u tell that I have cervical disability manifests with pain and limitation of motion with associated neurological symptoms of sensory deficit. U never talk of my services records every thing is 94-2001 I have a med 200 report 93 from army which tell that I had neck spasms this is not talk about or my neck therapy note from service tell that I was been treated for neck spasms. The rating code 5293 is not for neurological finding it for what I have muscle spasm absent ankle jerk, or other neurogical finding. For my elbow I believe there should be reconsideration because u says that I had problem with my hand but it would be pyramid. The board notes generally that because the veteran is already service connected for neurological manifestations of the cervical spine that he would not be entitled to a separate disability rating for neurological impairment of the left elbow please tell were is any of my neurological problem were every rated 94-until they are not even if u had give me 60% under rating code 5293 it is not for neurological defect its for the muscle spasms of the neck symptoms compatible with neuropathy. I believe this is a cue because from 94-until there is no rating give for my left elbow neurological problem so there can not be pyramid. I was in a sling for 3month after the fall my army notes tell of this. I wore 11/2after services u never talk of any reports before my comp exam 94 my army records are there u talk of them in the begin but nothing else. I believe you are not rating me 60% so that I can not get my IU which was remanded. I have not work since services due to my disability. And that u are cueing laws and reg that were in effect in 94 I believe I should get reconsideration due to all this. The non-adjudication of a claim expressly raised by the veteran. If the record shows veteran made a claim, which was simply overlooked and not decided by the VA, the claim is unadjudicated. That is it was never decided and it remains an open claim. If a veteran files a claim for the same benefit sometimes thereafter, normally by filing new and material evidence which reopens the claim, the effective date for this newly reopened claim relates back to the date of the filing of the prior, unadjudicated claim. So please tell how it is that I was granted 60% in 2001 and my claim for my neck was still open so my effective date is now 1994. I believe this is an error of the law. Please take a look at what is been done this not right I have not work due to this I have no ssi credit to get ssdi when older and I was pay 89.00 why my claim was never done I was not even look at for a pension. And it was part of the record then that I was not working I believe. That there are many things that have to be reconsider in my case. On decision u look at all the different rating codes u got to 5293 60% and u made no reference. That is an error of reg and laws I believe. All of my records where do I get relief I have over 17 yr of doctor report on the same thing. My neck and left arm. My cases has been advance up the docket due to my hardship and I was granted retro pay and I still have not rec a letter or any thing please help with this. I was granted 40%-94-2001 I done even no who to talk to that say amc has it there is no way to get to them they don’t answer iris or e mail I have fax things before they don’t get them. You remanded my IU claim for a doctor to tell if I could work in 94 is this for really I have been in voc rehab with 10% because of my employment handicap. I have not and was not working in 94 comp exam 94 say that I was not working my SSI earning reports show that I have not work in all these years all of this is part of the record. But some doc that has never treated me. Can tell if I could have work in 94. I believe this is an error of the law all of my records say I was not working. How is it because my claim was over look for 17 yr that u can just for get that I won in 2001 so my effective date is 94 u are trying to do my claim all over again how can this be right please tell me. If everything I am asking for was won in 2001 and then it is found that my claim from 94 is still open is my effective date now 94 please answer this because I believe it is the law. And I believe u are error the law

yes this my case number but bva has made a decision on my case my elbow was granted not percent give call amc told they will put a percent.granted 94-2001. my neck that was the same issue in 94 is now 20%94-2001. iu remaned got letter about this yesterday. so yes this is the old bva maybe they have not post the new came dec17.dont have sanner so will have to wait to post new decision. here is my reconsideration letter any way. eThis is my letter asking for reconsideration of my bva decision. First I would like to say that I believe my cases should be reconsider on the bases that my claim from 94 was for increase of the initial 10% give to me for my neck. I appeal and believe that since my claim was for and increase claim for my neck form 94 that was never adjucadated and I put in paper in 2001 which were treated as new material and I was granted 60% for my neck I believe my effective date should be 94. For my 60% rating I was rated under 5322 some one with a gunshot wound and I had no gun shot in 94. U have changed my rating code. Now to 5293 I don’t see how you can even say that I did not meet the requirements for a 60% rating under rating code 5293 in 94. A 60% rating is warranted when the intervertebral disc syndrome was pronounced with persistent symptoms compatible with sciatic neuropathy with characteristic pain and demonstrable muscle spasms, absent ankle jerk or other neurological findings appropriate to the site of the disk. I had neck spasm in 93 on med 200 report it tell of this all my records as u point out say that I had spasms in my neck. 94- until I had nothing but symptom that were compatible with sciatic neuropathy with pain u tell of all this and u even say that I had no neurological finding which is the last criteria for a 60% rating under 5293 I also believe there was a error of laws and regs. There must be a comparison between the level of severity and symptomatology of the claimant’s service-connected disability with the established criteria found in the rating schedule for that disability. Under the approach prescribed by the va if the criteria reasonably describe the claimants disability level and symptomatology, than the claimant disability picture is contemplated by the rating schedule the assigned scheduler evaluation is therefore adequate and no referral is required. I don’t see how this was over look and it even speaks of how marked interference with employment. Should be look at and I have not worked since services. Even when u take a look at if I should get extra-schedular rating u tell that I have cervical disability manifests with pain and limitation of motion with associated neurological symptoms of sensory deficit. U never talk of my services records every thing is 94-2001 I have a med 200 report 93 from army which tell that I had neck spasms this is not talk about or my neck therapy note from service tell that I was been treated for neck spasms. The rating code 5293 is not for neurological finding it for what I have muscle spasm absent ankle jerk, or other neurogical finding. For my elbow I believe there should be reconsideration because u says that I had problem with my hand but it would be pyramid. The board notes generally that because the veteran is already service connected for neurological manifestations of the cervical spine that he would not be entitled to a separate disability rating for neurological impairment of the left elbow please tell were is any of my neurological problem were every rated 94-until they are not even if u had give me 60% under rating code 5293 it is not for neurological defect its for the muscle spasms of the neck symptoms compatible with neuropathy. I believe this is a cue because from 94-until there is no rating give for my left elbow neurological problem so there can not be pyramid. I was in a sling for 3month after the fall my army notes tell of this. I wore 11/2after services u never talk of any reports before my comp exam 94 my army records are there u talk of them in the begin but nothing else. I believe you are not rating me 60% so that I can not get my IU which was remanded. I have not work since services due to my disability. And that u are cueing laws and reg that were in effect in 94 I believe I should get reconsideration due to all this. The non-adjudication of a claim expressly raised by the veteran. If the record shows veteran made a claim, which was simply overlooked and not decided by the VA, the claim is unadjudicated. That is it was never decided and it remains an open claim. If a veteran files a claim for the same benefit sometimes thereafter, normally by filing new and material evidence which reopens the claim, the effective date for this newly reopened claim relates back to the date of the filing of the prior, unadjudicated claim. So please tell how it is that I was granted 60% in 2001 and my claim for my neck was still open so my effective date is now 1994. I believe this is an error of the law. Please take a look at what is been done this not right I have not work due to this I have no ssi credit to get ssdi when older and I was pay 89.00 why my claim was never done I was not even look at for a pension. And it was part of the record then that I was not working I believe. That there are many things that have to be reconsider in my case. On decision u look at all the different rating codes u got to 5293 60% and u made no reference. That is an error of reg and laws I believe. All of my records where do I get relief I have over 17 yr of doctor report on the same thing. My neck and left arm. My cases has been advance up the docket due to my hardship and I was granted retro pay and I still have not rec a letter or any thing please help with this. I was granted 40%-94-2001 I done even no who to talk to that say amc has it there is no way to get to them they don’t answer iris or e mail I have fax things before they don’t get them. You remanded my IU claim for a doctor to tell if I could work in 94 is this for really I have been in voc rehab with 10% because of my employment handicap. I have not and was not working in 94 comp exam 94 say that I was not working my SSI earning reports show that I have not work in all these years all of this is part of the record. But some doc that has never treated me. Can tell if I could have work in 94. I believe this is an error of the law all of my records say I was not working. How is it because my claim was over look for 17 yr that u can just for get that I won in 2001 so my effective date is 94 u are trying to do my claim all over again how can this be right please tell me. If everything I am asking for was won in 2001 and then it is found that my claim from 94 is still open is my effective date now 94 pleas answer this because I believe it is the law. And I believe u are error the law here.