Eed Cue's

[carlie]

These are links to threads that contain past BVA Cues that I have posted.

I think most of these pertain to EED.

I hope these help one of my hadit buddies.

carlie

http://www.hadit.com/forums/index.php?show...&#entry3483 http://www.hadit.com/forums/index.php?show...&#entry3487 http://www.hadit.com/forums/index.php?show...&#entry3490 http://www.hadit.com/forums/index.php?show...&#entry9083 http://www.hadit.com/forums/index.php?show...&#entry9140

[john999]

VAwatchdog has an article about a "Fast Letter" designed to slow down or overturn large retro awards of over 250,000. Anyone who has a retro or service connection that goes back over 8 years is subject to this review process. This would be awful for CUE's that go back a long time and involve a lot of money. You have to read the article.

[john999]

Pete

On my CUE claim the VA did use some very dirty tricks like throwing in a medical report that was done ten years after the CUE decision. I called them on that and they threw it out, but I expect more dirty tricks. I was service connected in 1973 for schizophrenia and when I filed a CUE the VA went back and tried to say my unemployability was due to a personality disorder. This is the kind of BS you can expect.

[RockyA1911]

Well, I'm looking at a $200K plus retro award for skull loss claim in 1976 and that the VA awarded service connection in Feb 2007 using under reasons and bases citing the same military service medical records that that they used in 1976 to award the Post Concussion Residuals. They never denied the claim for skull loss at all, just rendered a decision for the claim of Post Concussion Residuals and I claimed both the skull loss and Post Concussions at the same time on my claim form and had exams for both and the VA Dr's confirmed the skull loss and size along with the Post Concussion Residuals. The VA never mentioned the skull loss anymore other than stating it in the same decision narrative with the menition of the 4.5cm x 4.5cm skull defect due to craniotomy and crainioplasty while on active duty (which is 50% under DC 5296 in 38CFR at that time and still current to date).

So I filed a CUE for 60% since I was awarded 10% for Post Concussion Residuals which is a combined rating of 60% with EED back to 28Nov1976.

I used the below VAOPGCPREC 4-2004 Case Law on Cue Claims in my Cue Claim along with the award decision service the connecting skull loss based on the medical evidence of 1976 claiming it.

I should have them in a vice grip on this one. I don't see how they can wiggle out of it since this precedent mirrors my claim exactly and meets all three of the things in the precedent. A precedent should trump any and all of the VA's slick tricks. My Cue has been at the rating board since 9 July,2007 and one rater made a decision on 19 July, 2007 with no deferrals. Then the CUE claim went to a second rater for a second opinion on 24 Aug, 2007. I was told this was done for a second opinion. They should be able to grant what I ask sometime in November I would think and I don't see how they can get out of not complying with a case law precedent.

The case law precedent should trump all the VA's objections in my case anyway.

Exhibit: VAOPGCPREC 4-2004 dated May 28, 2004, Case Law on Cue Claims

Memorandum

Department of Veterans Affairs

Date: May 28, 2004 VAOPGCPREC 4-2004

From: From: General Counsel (022)

Subj: Subj: Reconciliation of Moody v. Principi, 360 F.3d 1306 (Fed. Cir. 2004), and Case Law on CUE Claims

To: Chairman, Board of Veterans’ Appeals (01) Under Secretary for Benefits (20)

HELD:

For a final Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) or Board of Veterans' Appeals decision to be reversed or revised under 38 U.S.C. § 5109A or 7111 (clear and unmistakable error) on the ground that VA failed to recognize a claim for veterans benefits, it must be concluded that: (1) it is obvious or undebatable that, when prior filings are construed in the claimant’s favor, the pleadings constitute an earlier claim for the veterans benefit that was subsequently awarded by VA; and (2) VA's failure to recognize that claim manifestly affected the subsequent award of benefits. VAOPGCPREC 12-2001 is hereby superseded by this opinion.

Tim S. McClain

Edited October 13, 2007 by RockyA1911

[cowgirl]

Thanks John regards the "fast letter" mention. Its a good reminder that new information is always forthcoming. What is your current take on "personality disorder"? I too had that bogus reply statement on my C&P claim and SOC "explanation", ha! Sure would love to get over that

Rocky; good luck with your efforts, your're in my thoughts.cg

[john999]

My current take on the personality disorder gambit is that the best way to fight it is to get a good IMO to rebut it. I think since Iraq war started over 22,000 have been discharged for PD. Many of these had PTSD. It is much cheaper for the VA and DOD to just label a soldier or vet a PD than to treat them and compensate them. The whole VA/DOD system is adversarial. Many thousands of vets have been screwed out of compensation by a corrupt and deceptive system. Most don't know that when talking to a VA shrink you may be digging you claim's grave.

[Berta]

Rocky-good for you-

I used an OGC Pres Op too for my CUEs and also 4 BVA decisions that interpret this same pres op.

Oddly enough-when I filed a complaint with the OGC in DC this week against my POA I had to by way of the complaint attach other documents-

ironically the CUE and the OGC pres op etc as well as a claim that the VA has failed to decide in almost 5 fives.

It is a legal question issue and the RO should have sent it directly to the OGC-or denied it ---yet I have two letters from the RO promising me an administrative decision I have never gotten-I asked General Counsel

about 2 years ago to take jurisdiction over it but they couldnt- the RO has promised me a decision. but again- almost 5 years and it never came.

I also sent OGC- (really all this was for my complaint againt my Reps but lots came out of the woodwork)a letter from the RO VSM I received in Jan 2006 stating my issues and said my rep was present to define them t and here this claim that the VARO promised me a decision on was stated as "in appeals" yet I never got a decision.SOmeone from my POA allowed that inaccurate info to be in the VSM letter.They cant put a claim onto "appeal" status if they have never rendered any decision on it.

Ironically the OGC might well take jurisdiction over it now and that would be great although I want them to resolve the 23 page complaint against my reps that I attached 34 pieces of evidence too.

I realised -reading you post-that when you take a stand on something- it can ultimately begin to resolve many other issues too.

The day after my POA revoked my POA my claim went to a different DRO. This was the best news I had gotten in 4 1/2 years.

This whole POA mess I find myself in helps me to support my request to COngressman FIlner to propose my amendment to the VCAA. I am sending him this latest info tomorrow.

By the way my POA did not comply with Rule 608 and should never have revoked my POA as my AO claim is on remand. They cannot do that until they file Motion with the BVA and have "good cause" for the revocation. They never did that.

That- in the long run- could have added considerale more time to my AO claim- years in the system already because the POA does not know established VA case law-either regarding claims, and the VCAA and they dont even know the legal way to revoke POA of a claimant on BVA remand.

I am up against plenty here -the director and many vet reps named in my complaint-are all men paid by the state of NY -who consistently provided me with lousy representation and I kept extending them what I want from the VA itself-

Benefit of Doubt.

you would think they realised- since I do claims work myself- that of course I have plenty of Documentation that I sent to the OGC to prove they screwed up big time.

OGC said I would hear from them as soon as they got the complaint-filed under auspices of 38 USC 14.633.

Edited October 14, 2007 by Berta