JSM754

Sorry it has taken so long to get back to you. The Board's Decision dated 14 March 2005, denying an Earlier Effective Date as it pertained to the Cervical Spine Condition,was nothing more to me than temp setback. As soon as found out that the issue before the BVA for review, I knew I had a problem. I knew for a fact that the NYRO had screwed me, and there was absolutely no way I would get a Favorable Decision. You may be missing the point, I was issued Docket Number 95-30-377 in September 1995, and was closed as Advanced Allowed in the Field 21 October 1998, no matter how you slice it, 10 March 1998 was taken as a Second Appeal in Error because the first Appeal was still open. In addition had it not been for the Social Security Administration needing Medical Records from Claims Folder which was and still in Washington this is when I found an unsigned Certification of Appeal, dated 11/24/2004, that was never filed with the Board. So much for All Evidence of Record has been considered. This is no longer about any percentages those issues had long been resolved, it's about and only about the Date I Filed for an increased rating. The Cervical Spine Condition was still in Appeal Status at the time it was upgraded from 20% to 30% and made the Effective Date 5 October 2000, the Date of a Personal Hearing where in Error they took the Cervical Spine Condition as a reopened Claim. The more I disputed the Effective the worse things got. Once I was granted P&T IU I was given three different Effective Dates the last one being 10 March 1998. Once they realized that my Cervical Spine Condition was still in an Active and Open Appeal Status they made IU an issue which I could not understand because I never argued about an earlier Effective Date for IU.What I didn't know at the time, is that they couldn't grant the 60% back to June 1991 it all would have to be moved as a whole, 13 Years at 100%. It now has become Cover Up time at my expense. So this is the reason I am where I am today. I knew I had been screwed, but I just had to prove it.

Hi, I hope you are online. As I have said before no one is more stunned than I am, that my aMotion for Reconsideration has been granted. I keep hearing the same thing, that the BVA rarely grant Motions for Reconsideration. I guess I just got lucky. When the Board issued their Denial, there was no doubt in my mind that I had to be willing to go all of the way. Had it not been for the fact of the SSA, needing copies of Medical Reports from my C-File, which was in Case Storage in Washington, I probably would not have found exactly what I needed. This motion for Reconsideration, was granted by The Reconsideration Panel (BVA). Do I need or do you think I ned to submit Further Argument before the Expanded Reconsideration Panel.

Hi, Sorry I'm just now responding. To answer your question, it beats the hell out of me, just exactly what the Reconsideration Panel found because they they only say that my Motion for Reconsideration was being granted under 38 U.S.C 7103 which is "Reconsideration Correction of Obvious Error." But I can tell you is what I argued in my Motion 1. The Decision made by the Board (dtd 14 March 2005) was based on Errors of Fact or Law. 2. I argued that the NYRO did not find an error made on their part, that the Issue of my Cervical Spine Condition and only that Condition was still in Appeal Status and unresolved until they had granted P&T IU. And by their own admission had an effective date of 6 June 1991. 3. I argued that the 1996 Rating Decision granting a Combined 50% Rating, my Cervical Condition had an initial rating of 40%. The Combined Rating took the one condition and made it three. The Cervical Spine Condition being rerated as 20% disabling with the two additional conditions made a Total of 50%. I disagreed with that Decision as it pertained to the Cervical Spine. 4. I argued that going from 40% to 20% was in no way an increased rating. The Cervical Condition was in pending Appeal Review Status. I contented then as I do now that I have the right to disagree with a Decision on a whole or in part. Which is exactly what I did as it pertained to my Cervical Spine Condition. 5. I argued that once I disagreed, my right to Appeal Review should have continued, which did not happen. What did happen I asked again and again for the RO to reconsider their Decision as it pertained to the Cervical Spine Condition. With every Rating Decision, the 20% was continued and some new condition was added. 6. I agrued that with every request for Reconsideration by the NYRO, was an attempt to try and resolve the Issue of the Cervical Spine Condition while waiting for Appeal Review. 7. I argued that a 3 July 2002 Rating Decision granting a Combined Rating of 60% the Cervical Spine Condition went from 20% to 30% with an Effective Date of 5 October 2000. I disagreed with the Effective Date, because the Issue of the Cervical Spine Condition was still in pending Appeal Review Status unresolved and been issued a Docket Number in 1995. (It just goes from bad to worse at this point) The NYRO decided that I failed to Disagree in a timely manner, and only raised the Issue of the Cervical Spine at the 5 October 2000 Personal Hearing thus making 5 October 2000 the Effective Date. Fast forwarding I filed for IU in July 2002, which should come as no suprise it was denied over and over again. Finally in March 2004 it was granted with an effective date of October 2000. After being granted three different Effective Dates, on 4 October 2004 the DRO finds that I had been correct about the Cervical Spine Condition being in Active and Open Appeal Status with an Effective Date of June 1991. 8. This is where the NYRO takes the position that although they admit to their oversight and to avoid having to explain how this could happen, they chose to submit to the BVA for Review. 9. I argued that what the NYRO certified for Appeal Review had a 2000 Docket Number. In addition I argued that once the NYRO realized what had happened and the Cervical Spine Condition in Active Appeal Status with an effective date being 1991. The NYRO knew everything had to be granted as a whole. If this isn't enough detail, let me know. The Reconsideration Panel had to have something wrong with the Decision. If you have any advice get in touch.

Hi, I have fought this issue w/o Representation for 13 years, and just as I get to the end of the road, once again it's the Veteran who ends up paying he price. Docket number: 00-13-664, Citation number: 0507182 (date of Decision 14 March 2005.) Feel fre to read the Decision and tell what you think. Keep this point in mind: I asked for a Rating increase for my Cervical Spine Condition initally Rated 40% for the one condition. For 13 years I contended then as I still do now a rating of 40% to 20% is not an increased rating. I have the right to agree/disagree with any decision on as a whole or in part. Read the Decision, and let's discuss what I should do next. I, and I alone filed the Motion for Reconsideration of the BVA's decision. Without a doubt I am stunned and I'm sure the NYRO is more stunned than I am. Because now they are going to have to explain how by their own admission, this error went undetected for 13 years.

Hi, I have fought this issue w/o Representation for 13 years, and just as I get to the end of the road, once again it's the Veteran who ends up paying he price. Docket number: 00-13-664, Citation number: 0507182 (date of Decision 14 March 2005.) Feel fre to read the Decision and tell what you think. Keep this point in mind: I asked for a Rating increase for my Cervical Spine Condition initally Rated 40% for the one condition. For 13 years I contended then as I still do now a rating of 40% to 20% is not an increased rating. I have the right to agree/disagree with any decision on as a whole or in part. Read the Decision, and let's discus

Thank-You responding. The Motion was for Reconsideration of BVA denial. CUE is very hard to prove and you have to be on point. I argued "Errors of Fact or Law." Here's the important point and pay close attention: The NYRO, did not catch an error that I had an unresolved Issue in Active Appeal Status awaiting BVA Review with an Effective Date Of Claim (6June1991), until I had already been granted P&T, IU. You do the Math, it comes to a Total of 13 Years. Their refusal to resolve the matter at the RO level was based how they justify allowing an Issue to remain in Appeal Status and unresolved for 13 Years. To add insult to injury the RO certified for Appellant Review an Issue having a 2000 Docket Number. The BVA's decision dated 14 March 2005 denying me an earlier effective date as it pertained to my Cervical Condition was denied. It has taken me close to 15-16 years ajudicate this issue. When I filed my Motion for Reconsideration (own my own, may I add), would be a crap shoot at best. The Motion for Reconsideration Panel granted my Motion. Please tell me where I stand now????

I have been granted my Motion for Reconsideration of the BVA's denial for an Earlier Effective Date, in excess of 20% for My Cervical Spine Condition prior to 10 March 1998. Personaly I am stunned beyond belief. Here's why: 1. I filed for an increased evaluation rating, as it pertained to my Cervical Spine Condition, which had an initial rating of 40%. 2. The issue went into Appeal Status as of 12/6/94, and was given a 1995 Docket Number. 3. While a BVA Review, the NYRO granted a Combined Rating of 50%. The Cervical Spine Condition has now been rated at 20%, with 2 additional Conditions making the total of 50%. At the time of the Rating Decision, my Issue was in Appeal Status pending a BVA Review. 4. I disagreed with he Rating Decision, as it pertained to My Cervical Spine Condition and only that Condition, and in a timely manner. To make my long story short the Issue of My Cervical Spine Condition remained in an open Appeal Status and unresolved for close to 13 Years, due an error on the part of the NYRO. It wasn't until I had been granted "P&T " IU, their mistake was found. My question is, now that the Reconsideration Panel has granted my Motion (Correction of Obvious Error) should I present any further argument to the Expanded Recfon. Panel?? Can anyone Help me???

I was granted my Motion for Reconsideration of a BVA Decision, which I'm told doesn't happen very often. Does anyone know what my chances are that the OBVIOUS ERRORS found by the RECONSIDERATION Panel will get corrected????