My point is when they are asked to CUE themselves (I got a second DRO review in 2005 as well with this type of request) they have to do something.
Asking VA to CUE itself must be supported by some VA case law or legalize that applies to the claim and the request-as in your case here.
Berta (or others who know such things...),
I am very interested in this part. I sent a request for the VA to correct a clear and unmistakable error on my claim in February 2009. The issue was the November 2008 dismissal of my appeal as untimely, though it was clearly sent within the time-frame.
The VA signed for the CUE request document, and acknowledged by IRIS that they had received it. However, they referred to it as an NOD, rather than a CUE Request, in the IRIS. It is clearly labeled at the top of each page "Request for Correction of Clear and Unmistakable Error
RE: Dismissal of November 7, 2008 NOD".
As the VA did not take any action on my Request that they CUE itself, I also submitted an NOD on the same issue in October 2009, to assure that it is on record that I disagreed within the time-frame to do so.
However, it does seem like my claim might move faster if the moved on the CUE, and corrected the error, and then processed my initial NOD (as timely) than if they go all the way through the appeals process with the NOD on whether my appeal was timely, before they ever start dealing with my November 2008 NOD itself.
So I am interested in your statement that if you ask the VA to CUE themselves, they have to do something.
Would it be advisable for me to follow up and address that issue, and ask the VA when they expect they might address my February 2009 CUE request?
Question
free_spirit_etc
From another thread:
http://www.hadit.com/forums/index.php?showtopic=33395
Berta (or others who know such things...),
I am very interested in this part. I sent a request for the VA to correct a clear and unmistakable error on my claim in February 2009. The issue was the November 2008 dismissal of my appeal as untimely, though it was clearly sent within the time-frame.
The VA signed for the CUE request document, and acknowledged by IRIS that they had received it. However, they referred to it as an NOD, rather than a CUE Request, in the IRIS. It is clearly labeled at the top of each page "Request for Correction of Clear and Unmistakable Error
RE: Dismissal of November 7, 2008 NOD".
As the VA did not take any action on my Request that they CUE itself, I also submitted an NOD on the same issue in October 2009, to assure that it is on record that I disagreed within the time-frame to do so.
However, it does seem like my claim might move faster if the moved on the CUE, and corrected the error, and then processed my initial NOD (as timely) than if they go all the way through the appeals process with the NOD on whether my appeal was timely, before they ever start dealing with my November 2008 NOD itself.
So I am interested in your statement that if you ask the VA to CUE themselves, they have to do something.
Would it be advisable for me to follow up and address that issue, and ask the VA when they expect they might address my February 2009 CUE request?
Edited by free_spirit_etcLink to comment
Share on other sites
Top Posters For This Question
6
4
3
1
Popular Days
Dec 22
14
Dec 23
2
Dec 21
1
Top Posters For This Question
free_spirit_etc 6 posts
jerrbilly 4 posts
carlie 3 posts
JamesBreckenridge 1 post
Popular Days
Dec 22 2009
14 posts
Dec 23 2009
2 posts
Dec 21 2009
1 post
16 answers to this question
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now