"The veteran's CUE motion and supporting arguments are vague
and imprecise as to the precise legal basis by which he seeks
to invalidate the November 1982 Board decision. He maintains
first that the termination of the TDIU was "illegal and
irresponsible," and second, that the VA examination performed
in November 1980 was inadequate."
Regardless of that he fully restored his benefits due to CUE.
The American Legion repped him but I bet they probably didnt offer him much support -and his initial CUE was probably way too long.
I say keep everything as short as you can because lets face it-no one needs to read page after page if the point can be made simply.
Especially on CUES-
Roland- ( known this vet for long time! glad you are here!) if I didnt email you this in the past I can if you need this case. just email me-
This BVA CUE vet persisted! And throughout the actual claim that led to the BVA case he apparently was concise enough to get a good decision from the BVA.
Cue criteria:
1. final decision
2.misapplication of regs and or laws at the time
3. outcome manifestly different (more retro or restored benefits- in this case)
My two present CUES at VA are limited to about 5-6 sentences each and I attached copy of the decisions being CUED.
One CUE I filed many many years ago-
I wasnt even sure if it was a CUE or not in those days-1995- I simply said:
WHERE's MY MONEY?
And then I stated ( I was really mad) the atrocious error they had made in a decision and sent them copy of the decision.I called it an obvious clear and unmistakable error that anyone who could do simple math should not have made.
I threw in capricious and arbitrary too.I was livid!
Three weeks later I got the money-
That claim is in one of my very old computers-something about their decision letter suggested I could not appeal it so I filed it as a CUE.
Caluza Triangle – Caluza vs Brown defined what is necessary for service connection. See COVA– CALUZA V. BROWN–TOTAL RECALL
This has to be MEDICALLY Documented in your records:
Current Diagnosis. (No diagnosis, no Service Connection.)
In-Service Event or Aggravation.
Nexus (link- cause and effect- connection) or Doctor’s Statement close to: “The Veteran’s (current diagnosis) is at least as likely due to x Event in military service”
VA has gotten away with (mis) interpreting their ambigious, , vague regulations, then enforcing them willy nilly never in Veterans favor.
They justify all this to congress by calling themselves a "pro claimant Veteran friendly organization" who grants the benefit of the doubt to Veterans.
This is not true,
Proof:
About 80-90 percent of Veterans are initially denied by VA, pushing us into a massive backlog of appeals, or worse, sending impoverished Veterans "to the homeless streets" because when they cant work, they can not keep their home. I was one of those Veterans who they denied for a bogus reason: "Its been too long since military service". This is bogus because its not one of the criteria for service connection, but simply made up by VA. And, I was a homeless Vet, albeit a short time, mostly due to the kindness of strangers and friends.
Hadit would not be necessary if, indeed, VA gave Veterans the benefit of the doubt, and processed our claims efficiently and paid us promptly. The VA is broken.
A huge percentage (nearly 100 percent) of Veterans who do get 100 percent, do so only after lengthy appeals. I have answered questions for thousands of Veterans, and can only name ONE person who got their benefits correct on the first Regional Office decision. All of the rest of us pretty much had lengthy frustrating appeals, mostly having to appeal multiple multiple times like I did.
I wish I know how VA gets away with lying to congress about how "VA is a claimant friendly system, where the Veteran is given the benefit of the doubt". Then how come so many Veterans are homeless, and how come 22 Veterans take their life each day? Va likes to blame the Veterans, not their system.
However, (and I have no idea of knowing whether or not you would likely succeed) Im unsure of why you seem to be so adamant against getting an increase in disability compensation.
When I buy stuff, say at Kroger, or pay bills, I have never had anyone say, "Wait! Is this money from disability compensation, or did you earn it working at a regular job?" Not once. Thus, if you did get an increase, likely you would have no trouble paying this with the increase compensation.
However, there are many false rumors out there that suggest if you apply for an increase, the VA will reduce your benefits instead.
That rumor is false but I do hear people tell Veterans that a lot. There are strict rules VA has to reduce you and, NOT ONE of those rules have anything to do with applying for an increase.
Yes, the VA can reduce your benefits, but generally only when your condition has "actually improved" under ordinary conditions of life.
Unless you contacted the VA within 72 hours of your medical treatment, you may not be eligible for reimbursement, or at least that is how I read the link, I posted above. Here are SOME of the rules the VA must comply with in order to reduce your compensation benefits:
NOTE: TO PROVE CAUSE OF DEATH WILL LIKELY REQUIRE AN AUTOPSY. This means if you die of a SC condtion, your spouse would need to do an autopsy to prove cause of death to be from a SC condtiond. If you were P and T for 10 full years, then the cause of death may not matter so much.
Question
Guest Berta
http://www.va.gov/vetapp01/files02/0117428.txt
This veterans compensation had been reduced!
You can readily see he was dealing with a lot-
The BVA even stated this:
"The veteran's CUE motion and supporting arguments are vague
and imprecise as to the precise legal basis by which he seeks
to invalidate the November 1982 Board decision. He maintains
first that the termination of the TDIU was "illegal and
irresponsible," and second, that the VA examination performed
in November 1980 was inadequate."
Regardless of that he fully restored his benefits due to CUE.
The American Legion repped him but I bet they probably didnt offer him much support -and his initial CUE was probably way too long.
I say keep everything as short as you can because lets face it-no one needs to read page after page if the point can be made simply.
Especially on CUES-
Roland- ( known this vet for long time! glad you are here!) if I didnt email you this in the past I can if you need this case. just email me-
This BVA CUE vet persisted! And throughout the actual claim that led to the BVA case he apparently was concise enough to get a good decision from the BVA.
Cue criteria:
1. final decision
2.misapplication of regs and or laws at the time
3. outcome manifestly different (more retro or restored benefits- in this case)
My two present CUES at VA are limited to about 5-6 sentences each and I attached copy of the decisions being CUED.
One CUE I filed many many years ago-
I wasnt even sure if it was a CUE or not in those days-1995- I simply said:
WHERE's MY MONEY?
And then I stated ( I was really mad) the atrocious error they had made in a decision and sent them copy of the decision.I called it an obvious clear and unmistakable error that anyone who could do simple math should not have made.
I threw in capricious and arbitrary too.I was livid!
Three weeks later I got the money-
That claim is in one of my very old computers-something about their decision letter suggested I could not appeal it so I filed it as a CUE.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Top Posters For This Question
1
Popular Days
Feb 16
2
Sep 14
1
Top Posters For This Question
HeadCraft 1 post
Popular Days
Feb 16 2006
2 posts
Sep 14 2005
1 post
2 answers to this question
Recommended Posts