ptsd Is It A Cue When The Exam & Rating Ignores Issues Claimed?

[hedgey]

So rather than working on the statement for my DH's PTSD claim, I'm avoiding it by thinking about the possibility of a CUE.

As I've said, he had an in-service MVA and was badly burned, (plus had his brains rattled for him, but that's another issue..) leaving him with a messed up should & lots of scars both 2nd & 3rd degree.

His original claim for compensation was filed about a month after he separated from the Army, and he claimed "shoulder pain and scarring of back, head, neck, shoulder, arms and hands due to 2nd & 3rd degree burns". Kinda vague, but still.

The Request for Examination form mentions his shoulder and the burn scars on his head, neck, arms, back and shoulder.

The examination notes, well, it's doctor scribble.

The rating decision is typed, and gives him 30% for his loss of motion & pain in his shoulder. It then says that his 3rd degree burns were successfully grafted and are rated as 2nd degree burn scars. They gave him 10% bilateral for each arm, 50% total - Permanent.

Nothing is mentioned at all about his back, his neck or his head. Not a word.

This all came from his C-file. We couldn't find any records of the forms that would have explained his appeal process, etc.

He was thrilled to get anything at all from the VA, and never considered arguing with them. He had enough torment with allowing anyone to examine him in the first place, so he left it. He'd gotten severance from the Army and had to wait for the off-set to be paid, but then got his 50%

So in 2009, he filed again and when he got his new rating decision, they raised him to 80% because they granted him a couple of 30% for 3rd degree burn scars and scars on his head. No increase to his shoulder, but the examiner pushed his arm around to give him a good ROM

We filed a NOD, saying they should have given him the ratings back in 1985, he should get retro, etc. Also, complained about the examination itself.

It wound up getting dropped because he couldn't go to another C&P. We have a big fat SOC, which gives lots of excuses why he doesn't get retro because he didn't appeal.

But is there a CUE here? Can we make them reopen his original claim (I know, different thing from CUE)....

Okay, I'm going back to work on that other statement. I just really hate writing it. It makes me sad.

[Berta]

“So in 2009, he filed again and when he got his new rating decision, they raised him to 80% because they granted him a couple of 30% for 3rd degree burn scars and scars on his head. No increase to his shoulder, but the examiner pushed his arm around to give him a good ROM”

The scar rating schedule changed some time ago and his past ratings might have been based on the older scar criteria.

The new criteria is in the Schedule of Ratings and possibly in the Fast Letter forum here.

“We filed a NOD, saying they should have given him the ratings back in 1985, he should get retro, etc. Also, complained about the examination itself.

It wound up getting dropped because he couldn't go to another C&P.”

Do you mean that claim was over and final?

“We have a big fat SOC, which gives lots of excuses why he doesn't get retro because he didn't appeal.”

Is this a recent SOC and is he still in appellate process or is that an older SOC?

You asked

"Is It A Cue When The Exam & Rating Ignores Issues Claimed?"

I succeeded on a CUE recently because a 1998 decision ignored any Diagnosic code or rating at all for my husband's fatal IHD.

This disability was clearly established within the rating decision and stated as one of the malpracticed conditions that caused Rod's death.

CUE claims rest on established medical evidence and established SC disabilities.

I dont know why they ignored some disabilities he claimed.

"Nothing is mentioned at all about his back, his neck or his head. Not a word."

I hope others chime in here.

I saw a case at the BVA some time ago where the veteran was sced for multiple scars but the decision on remand involved many more scars.I think he claimed about 30 or more scars.

[carlie]

Are you asking if there is a cue in that no mental health

was addressed from the accident ?

[mysticcherokee usn vet]

Whats a "IHD?" N Berta, I cannot even imagine, how awful. Im SO SORRY to hear about your Husband. OMGoodness, I cannot even imagine! Sincerely, Mystic

[Philip Rogers]

Without knowing the particulars of his case, I believe he could have a CUE claim dating back to his original award date. The VA may have erred in his original award by not allowing for some scarring and perhaps some other underlying tissue and nerve damage. I'd certainly review all of his c-file, especially the evidence used in the original award and his current conditions. jmo

To the best of my knowledge, the nerve endings are destroyed in 3rd degree burns and it doesn't sound like they rated any nerve damage. Please, look into it.

pr

Edited February 21, 2012 by Philip Rogers