Cue

[FrankieG23]

I don't have a clue on cue. I have read previous post about them. Is it better to use atty or husband's VSO? It is involving the missing of getting NSC for IHD VA had evidence (it included an ER visit), and hospital is listed on records the VA received. However, when requesting for Nehmer it was denied, but the hospital was not listed this new time (2010) as records they used. If they didn't use the records from (2001), is this also a CUE? I had called his whole family back in 2001 as hospital told me the believed he had a heart attack. I don't want to give up. I am inspired by this web site, and all the great people on it. Side note: After my call to VA, a couple days later I was contacted by JD Powers to rate VA performance!!!

[Berta]

It could have been a mild ischemic event that was a predecessor to the full blown IHD.

I had to read my husband's med recs many many times.It pays to use google for some of the medical terms. The internet was so limited when I reviewed the medical documentation. and the VA med consult notes were all handwritten in those days.

I am sure they did an EKG. Then again maybe not.

[broncovet]

You have been given great advice. Go over your medical records. If you are disputing a decision within a year, then dont file a CUE, file a NOD instead. If you are disputing an earlier unappealed decision (more than a year ago), then you may have to file a CUE. If you did file a NOD and if you disputed the issue at hand and the DRO-BVA did not adjuticate the issue you disputed, then you may have to file a CUE. Fortunately, the Va is required to consider all evidence, and if your NOD disputed an issue, and then it was never adjuticated, you probably have a "pending claim" and wont have to file a CUE. Just simply remind them: I disputed this issue in my NOD dated 11-13-2005, but it was not adjuticated in the BVA decision of 1-17 2009.

You can even submit new evidence, anytime, to a "pending claim". You/your lawyer may have to argue that the unadjuticated claim at issue was NOT "deemed denied", because there is no way you would have known it to be denied.

[FrankieG23]

Ok, well got offical white envelope. Granted tinnitus, (made claim on 10/10, granted date 2/11, I said huh? so I called VA as I was confused) I thought they did a copy and paste and forgot to change date from a decision of another vet. It was granted from date I made some phone call. Hell, I was always calling the VA. Ok no biggie, it effects no monetary issue. Hubby got ED and the grant date was right and retro was for SMC, (it doesn't say anthing about K). Well here comes to the CUE part. It stated he was denied CAD in 11/03 (He's been 100% for Heart Disease since 8/03, he was 70% in 6/03) and since it's past a year without an appeal, the only recourse is CUE the VA said.. Ughhhhhh, the 70% was for stenting clogged arteries and ablation to heart, the ablation to heart was fast beats. Ok isnt' all that CAD? The only thing he want's to contest is the Nehmer, and that's it. Why would he have appealed, some decision in 11/03 that was after his 100% and I don't even remember this denial. That's why I thought the VA combined 2 Vets decision together. In an earlier rating back in 5/12, it stated he was denied Nehmer do to nothing showing up in records addressing IHD prior to grant of 6/03. Am I confusing CAD with IHD? i imagine this whole response is due to VSO sending in a letter after VA denied Nehmer in May. Letter said, "Vet believes VA had in it's records medical records of the IHD, ie the heart attack in 2001 and C & P of 2001" (copy of the C & P exam attached to letter. This rest of the above is due to being defered issues from claim of 10/10. So why the talk about the CAD being denied in the defered part of rating? I had initially requested only because I was told by 800 number to do that, I thought the heart disease needed to be made primary now, and taken off secondary to DMII. I am now more confused then ever. I just glad he got new condition so he can put in for the disabled insurance. I am sad that hubby and all others were soooo screwed up by Agent Orange. Bless you all.

[FrankieG23]

Here is the only thing he wants to contest which is the Nehmer decision on IHD, which was made in May of 2012, It had not been a year since this denial. So would it still be done on a NOD or a CUE?

[carlie]

Here is the only thing he wants to contest which is the Nehmer decision on IHD, which was made in May of 2012, It had not been a year since this denial. So would it still be done on a NOD or a CUE?

CUE on the claimants part,is applicable to a Finally adjudicated claim.

http://www.ecfr.gov/cgi-bin/text-idx?c=ecfr&SID=1ca416e8c55827ed342a39ad76d06890&rgn=div8&view=text&node=38:1.0.1.1.4.1.60.69&idno=38

§ 3.160 Status of claims.

The following definitions are applicable to claims for pension, compensation, and dependency and indemnity compensation.

(a) Informal claim. See § 3.155.

(b) Original claim. An initial formal application on a form prescribed by the Secretary. (See §§ 3.151, 3.152).

© Pending claim. An application, formal or informal, which has not been finally adjudicated.

(d) Finally adjudicated claim. An application, formal or informal, which has been allowed or disallowed by the agency of original jurisdiction, the action having become final by the expiration of 1 year after the date of notice of an award or disallowance, or by denial on appellate review, whichever is the earlier. (See §§ 20.1103 and 20.1104 of this chapter.)

(e) Reopened claim. Any application for a benefit received after final disallowance of an earlier claim, or any application based on additional evidence or a request for a personal hearing submitted more than 90 days following notification to the appellant of the certification of an appeal and transfer of applicable records to the Board of Veterans Appeals which was not considered by the Board in its decision and was referred to the agency of original jurisdiction for consideration as provided in § 20.1304(b)(1) of this chapter.

(Authority: 38 U.S.C. 501)

(f) Claim for increase. Any application for an increase in rate of a benefit being paid under a current award, or for resumption of payments previously discontinued.

[27 FR 11887, Dec. 1, 1962, as amended at 31 FR 12056, Sept. 15, 1966; 55 FR 20148, May 15, 1990; 58 FR 32445, June 10, 1993]