Jump to content
HadIt.com Future: Zoom Meeting Dec 3, 2022 02:00 PM Mountain Time (US and Canada) - Join Us. ×
It Turns Out HadIt.com Is Not Dead Yet! ×
  • 0

Terry- Got News On My Cue Claims


Guest Berta

Question

My SMC CUE claim is what the big rush was over the past two weeks-

They said it was "referred for immediate developmental action"- yeah right-

But they also stated this in reference to my other CUE claim-

(This is a CUE because the VA failed to rate the veteran's significant heart disease, manifested by misdiagnosed heart attack in 1988 and then which led progressively to his death in 1994.)

"We will handle this issue as an attempt to reopen this claim as a CUE for service connected death."

Hmmmm? that is interesting-But they still have to rate the veteran in a staged rating for CAD.

I think they might try to snook me-

My main claim -with irrefutable and undebatable medical evidence to support is for SC death due to DMII from AO (Nehmer) -over 11 years DIC retro-as a separate issue from the 1151 DIC I get (per NVLSP)

Terry -do you smell somehing fishy in their re -interpretation of my Cue for rating of heart disease?

It could be a stall tactic-????

they certainly did a lot of movement with the SMC claim recently however- the SMC (I told them the "S" is obvious but that "would be unacceptable" ad I want the R-1 level at 2 years retro -vet-wife and one child-less the 100% they sent already)

This claim would be dependent on the heart issue too-the veteran's disabilities were:

PTSD 100% SC,

CVA,and residuals 100% 1151,

Cardiomyopathy 100% 1151,

HBP -rated 10% under NSC- yet it's treatment per VA contributed to death (100%???) and the visual problems, hyperlipedimia, etc- many other conditions never rated.

At least they have acknowledged all of my claims- like Leroy under VCAA post- they say I will get VCAA letters- I dont think I ever got any in 3 years-

Also- they want to submit a letter I wrote to the director as my formal 1-9 appeal-

they aint gonna do that! It covered a lot but I got some pointers from NVLSP in the VBM on I-9s and want that to be perfect.

I have time left and am preparing it to mail by Monday-

Terry-ever hear of that being done before?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Answers 4
  • Created
  • Last Reply

4 answers to this question

Recommended Posts

Guest VetWife Advocate
My SMC CUE claim is what the big rush was over the past two weeks-

They said it was "referred for immediate developmental action"- yeah right-

But they also stated this in reference to my other CUE claim-

(This is a CUE because the VA failed to rate the veteran's significant heart disease, manifested by misdiagnosed heart attack in 1988 and then which led progressively to his death in 1994.)

"We will handle this issue as an attempt to reopen this claim as a CUE for service connected death."

Hmmmm? that is interesting-But they still have to rate the veteran in a staged rating for CAD.

I think they might try to snook me-

My main claim -with irrefutable and undebatable medical evidence to support is for SC death due to DMII from AO (Nehmer) -over 11 years DIC retro-as a separate issue from the 1151 DIC I get (per NVLSP)

Terry -do you smell somehing fishy in their re -interpretation of my Cue for rating of heart disease?

Berta,

NVLP? Who would be a good SO in their office. I think we still need one, but I need someone competent!! Hard to find. Thanks,

Brenda

It could be a stall tactic-????

they certainly did a lot of movement with the SMC claim recently however- the SMC (I told them the "S" is obvious but that "would be unacceptable" ad I want the R-1 level at 2 years retro -vet-wife and one child-less the 100% they sent already)

This claim would be dependent on the heart issue too-the veteran's disabilities were:

PTSD 100% SC,

CVA,and residuals 100% 1151,

Cardiomyopathy 100% 1151,

HBP -rated 10% under NSC- yet it's treatment per VA contributed to death (100%???) and the visual problems, hyperlipedimia, etc- many other conditions never rated.

At least they have acknowledged all of my claims- like Leroy under VCAA post- they say I will get VCAA letters- I dont think I ever got any in 3 years-

Also- they want to submit a letter I wrote to the director as my formal 1-9 appeal-

they aint gonna do that! It covered a lot but I got some pointers from NVLSP in the VBM on I-9s and want that to be perfect.

I have time left and am preparing it to mail by Monday-

Terry-ever hear of that being done before?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest VetWife Advocate

Berta,

NVLP? Who would be a good SO in their office. I think we still need one, but I need someone competent!! Hard to find. Thanks,

Brenda

It could be a stall tactic-????

Still can't figure out what happended; this posted in the middle of Berta's post!!!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Terry-I have tremendous value for your take on claims matters-

"When this was before the raters. Did the raters know he had died of heart desease and that it was misdiagnossed by the VA, and that misdiagnosis was the cause of his death? Did they have a medical opnion saying so? "

I won the Section 1151 in 1997 -I diagnosed the veteran myself-with heart disease and two other conditions and they- after 3 years-concurred-

I should be happy and go away -However- I also realised that Rod had diabetes- my daughter -home on leave while in the military- she is the one who recognised his symptoms as diabetes-

I couldn't see the link at first but found all I needed right in the med recs- and Dr. Bash concurred-

The VA did suspect DMII while Rod was hospitalized but they could not give him OGTT because his throat was paralyzed- he couldn't swallow-

these were all Neuro docs and they all acted like they were in charge-

One doc who ordered the fngerstick test was apparently told it would have to wait for the MRI .When the MRI occurred my husband (who the dopes said would never walk againa or even return home) managed to

recover enough to be discharged. He was dealing with so much that- based on his discharge certificate and an appt 8 months in the future- we saw no reason to think he would get worse and we figured they ruled out DMII by other tests-

NVLSP told me that even though this is Sec 1151 DIC- if I am successful under direct SC claim that they are working on now- the VA must pay me 11 years retro DIC under Nehmer as well as REPS, burial -some other stuff---I forget- NVLSP had no case at all similiar to mine-

to put into the VBM. I was shocked-

I had filed the claim months before we talked and had only expected REPS and some other minor awards.

I am trying to succeed for them as well as for Rod-and anyone else with similiar case- I have seen a few at hadit over the last 3 years and have a friend with similiar one-

The point that Ron Abrams made to me (NVLSP) is that these are distinct and separate issues. They fought hard for Beverly Nehmer- there is no Sec 1151 offset to an additional Agent Orange condition.

Terry -you are assessing this very well-

The VA already admitting to misdiagnosis (and no diagnosis of ) of heart disease, transcient brain ischemia and improper meds- which all contributed to his death.

Only one part of my charges- was not concurred with-the rest of them were-

so they have already documented their medical screw ups long ago-at VA Central- I have their report-

but it never included DMII-

I have 2 IMOS that support my claim (which I sent in Nov 2004 and they still have not been addressed,had to print onto the back of my additional submissions-many times) my vet rep had a meeting last week with them again-(VARO VSM)as he felt the IMOS should have given me award in Sept, I sent them considerable medical evidence of DMII in VA med recs and it is "more than likely" I have made the point that-since they could not diagnose and treat the other disabilities that caused Rod's death- they sure could not have diagnosed diabetes properly but it certainly is evident that 3 doctors know Rod had DMII but -with their diagnosis at that point, it would have proven the VA docs in the other VAMC were dopes. and comitted malpractice (I already proved that to VA anyhow)

Sorry for long story-

I went through quite an ordeal in the past with this VARO because it involved MONEY-

That is the reason they are screwing around with me now-

Nehmer and Sec 1151- they never had a case like that before -

Heard yesterday that the DRO is getting the claim back by the 18th.

Terry- you see what they are attempting to do- try to award direct SC on heart disease-

and then say well you get DIC anyhow so this maintains the status quo---and you will get your REPS, Burial etc- Chap 35 extention-but-

I aint buying into that-

I want (and refuse to accept anything else) direct SC death for Rod due to his DMII from his heavy proven exposure (USDC) to AO in Ashau Valley and other points in Vietnam.

I think they probably think I got this letter about the new CUE they are trying to open for me somehow-

and that I jumped for joy-but

I immediately recognized this as an attempt to snooker me-it is really ridiculous- the VA already said heart disease,strokes, and improper HBP meds as well as sudafed caused his death-however it was diabetes from AO that caused his heart,brain, and HBP problems.

They have done quite a bit with my SMC CUE claim- but I dont know the results-

Brenda NVLSP- National Veterans Legal Service Program-

They are the Pro Bono lawyers who write the VBM.

They do not represent many claimants-only those in unusally situations-they said they would help me if I succeed in this claim -if the VARO wont pay the retro DIC-only because they won Nehmer and my claim would fall under the Court Order for Nehmer.

I prepared my formal I-9-got to type it up-

if this ever gets to the BVA- this VARO will look like a bunch of fools.

They continue to deny me basic rights in 38 CFR by their deliberate failure to address my "overwhelming, irrefutable and undisputable medical evidence"-and I state it just like that - on each additional evidence submission I make. I had 3-4 years of the sameo sameo crap from them- in the past---

Knowing those claims turned out in my favor anyhow makes me inspired but my vet rep (who did not handle my last claims) cannot understand why they are doing this to me.

I do. Money and the fact that this is a 'first of its kind' claim.

Edited by Berta (see edit history)
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Terry- the case that might establish precedent is this one:

Bonny V Principi altered the two year retro on accrued payments for widows/widowers of vets with claims awarded posthumously.

Now these claimants get ALL accrued benefits- no 2 year limit-anymore.

But the final regs said that the veteran had to have died after Dec 16, 2003.

My claim is this- in the case of Section 1151 deaths prior to Dec 16, 2003, where VA admitted to causing the veteran's death (like in my husband's case)AND the veteran could not hang on until Dec 16, 2003 -DUE TO VA medical

care (if the survivor has that documented through Sec 1151 award letter),

then VA has to pay the surviving spouse ALL accrued benefits posthumously due the veteran.

I claimed they owe me additional accrued benefits of one year.

That claim they have said twice "will receive an administrative decision"- in three years however, no one at this "administration" has been able to make that "decision".

They should have given this claim to the Regional Counsel- I haven't even gotten a VCAA letter on it yet (3 years ago I filed it)

I put some heat on them 2 weeks ago and they send they are sending 3 VCAA letters- when I get that on this claim I will ask them to give it to VA counsel because pbviously they cannot make a decision on it-

This is how it will establish precedent.

Even though VA never had a claim before like my other AO claim-that will not establish precedent unless it goes to the CAVC. But I dont think they even want it to go to the BVA.

I think they are hoping I will croak and then they dont have to deal with any of it anymore.

Edited by Berta (see edit history)
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.


×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

{terms] and Guidelines