I have been working on and researching the CUE Claim Process.
Today I called the PVA paralyzed veterans of America, this was the winston salam office in NC where my Orginal claim was denied. I did this because that was the place the CUE was commited on my claim. I thought that might be the place to file the CUE because that VARO would be the RO that gave me that decision.
:( :(
Well I explained to the PVA officer the reason of the deniel and stated that I found the records that the decision was made without- and they should have had when making the decision. He said that without me appealing the original decision within one year that the decision was final and I could not go with an collateral attack - CUE
My understanding of a CUE is 3 things #1 the decision was never appealed
#2 it involves an error to the appl of a fact or law that existed when the cue was made and #3 it would change the outcome of the past claim if sucessfull and its the only way to recover lost retro in the decision that was never applealed.
Now the decision was in 1994 and it was made with the reasons on the denial being No SMR's from time claimed, I found them in 2005 and refiled. tell me if I am wrong or I'm
,I am right, Is the man that I called giving me bad info or am I understanding the CUE thing all Wrong?
Question
Done wit this
Hi everyone,
I have been working on and researching the CUE Claim Process.
Today I called the PVA paralyzed veterans of America, this was the winston salam office in NC where my Orginal claim was denied. I did this because that was the place the CUE was commited on my claim. I thought that might be the place to file the CUE because that VARO would be the RO that gave me that decision.
:( :(
Well I explained to the PVA officer the reason of the deniel and stated that I found the records that the decision was made without- and they should have had when making the decision. He said that without me appealing the original decision within one year that the decision was final and I could not go with an collateral attack - CUE
My understanding of a CUE is 3 things #1 the decision was never appealed
#2 it involves an error to the appl of a fact or law that existed when the cue was made and #3 it would change the outcome of the past claim if sucessfull and its the only way to recover lost retro in the decision that was never applealed.
Now the decision was in 1994 and it was made with the reasons on the denial being No SMR's from time claimed, I found them in 2005 and refiled. tell me if I am wrong or I'm
,I am right, Is the man that I called giving me bad info or am I understanding the CUE thing all Wrong?
Thanks for any help you people can give.
Macool
Edited by macoolLink to comment
Share on other sites
Top Posters For This Question
5
3
2
1
Popular Days
Sep 18
10
Dec 3
2
Sep 17
1
Sep 19
1
Top Posters For This Question
Done wit this 5 posts
Berta 3 posts
Jay Johnson 2 posts
jbasser 1 post
Popular Days
Sep 18 2007
10 posts
Dec 3 2007
2 posts
Sep 17 2007
1 post
Sep 19 2007
1 post
13 answers to this question
Recommended Posts