Hve 2 New Ime

[hmcquade]

Happy to report I have 2 new IME from my Doctors and waiting on Dr. Sniger IMO so I can file for a Reconsideration.

Hugh

[Fat]

An NOD might be faster than a straight reconsideration. Dont forget about about the one year time frame to appeal.

[hmcquade]

Slowlane is right.

A reconsideration request does not alter or stop the NOD deadline.

"and I am really not sure what I should state in the Reconsideration letter."

" I found the RO and the C&P Dr. were inaccurate and biased." I am sure ..but....t doesnt matter what you found, it matters what the IMO/IME docs found.

As long as these IMOs/IMEs conform to the IMO/IME criteria here at hadit in our IMO forum, the VA will consider them as probatiove evidence.

I assume they both had copies of any negative C & P exam results to shape their opinion with, as well as all pertinent medical records.

I too wonder how much time you have before the NOD deadline.

I filed for reconsideration of denial of my 2004 CUE claim, and the VA responed to me many times acting like they were 'working on' the CUE.

Bu they were really just trying to piss away my NOD deadline.I filed NOD at the last minute.

Just ask them to reconsider their decision based on the enclosed evidence, identify the evidence enclosed , ,copy all of it and get a proof of mailing.

Thanks that makes since, I have a year to file but am ready now. I am concerned about the DAV SO they really screwed up with the claim

Hugh

[hmcquade]

An NOD might be faster than a straight reconsideration. Dont forget about about the one year time frame to appeal.

The DAV SO at the Saginaw VA Hospital encouraged me not to file a NOD but a Reconsideration with new medical evidence for the Denial. He stated the Reconsideration would be faster

Hugh

[Berta]

That certainly can be true, Hugh, a faster resolve, and I don't disagree with your DAV rep....

My point was that I suffered under some illusion that VA was actually considering my recon request and I luckily had marked my calender for the NOD deadline and got that in on time.

That should not be the case here....in your situation. Hopefully it might be cut and dried.

My recon request involved a CUE so that is why they stalled.

Edited June 4, 2014 by Berta

[hmcquade]

That certainly can be true, Hugh, a faster resolve, and I don't disagree with your DAV rep....

My point was that I suffered under some illusion that VA was actually considering my recon request and I luckily had marked my calender for the NOD deadline and got that in on time.

That should not be the case here....in your situation. Hopefully it might be cut and dried.

My recon request involved a CUE so that is why they stalled.

Thanks Berta,

Here is what the C&P Dr stated in her report

Was the Veteran's VA claims file reviewed? Yes

If yes, list any records that were reviewed but were not included in the

Veteran's VA claims file:

C file reviewed in VBMS. Medial records form private physician

reviewed.

MEDICAL OPINION SUMMARY

-----------------------

RESTATEMENT OF REQUESTED OPINION:

a. Opinion from general remarks: Per VA form 2507, "Exams on this

request DBQ

artery and vein. Medical opinion. Type of medial opinion requested:

secondary service connection. Contention: peripheral occlusive arterial

diesease, bilateral legs secondary to diabetes mellitus 2. The Veteran is

claiming thai his PAOD bilateral legs was proximately due to or the result

of

his serice conneted 20% diabetes mellitus type 2. Opinion requested: Is

sthe Veterqan's POAD proximately due to or the result of his service

connected diabetes mellitus?"

C file reviewed through VBMS.

b. Indicate type of exam for which opinion has been requested: DBQ artery

and

veing

TYPE OF MEDICAL OPINION PROVIDED: [ MEDICAL OPINION FOR SECONDARY SERVICE

CONNECTION ]

b. The condition claimed is less likely than not (less than 50%

probability) proximately due to or the result of the Veteran's service

connected condition.

c. Rationale: Veteran's PAOD is not proximately due to, caused by or

aggravated by diabetes mellitus type2/miitary service.

Rationale: There is no medical nexus to establish causality between PAOD

and

diabetes mellitus type 2/ military service. C file evidences a letter

written by the Veteran to RO on 11-21-2013 stating, "I asked Dr. Samuels

to

write a statement that it was at least as likely as not that the POAD was

caused by the service connected diabetes 2 but her letter does not. I do

not

know how much help it would be." Medical records evidence a letter by

Dr.

Samuels, stateing "Veteran H.M. has occulusive arterial disease which

could

possibly be due to his type 2 diabetes." This statement is not

substantiated

by any objective medical evidence of record, nor does it establish a medical

nexus. Likewise, another private physician of the Veteran's , Dr. H.

Thawani

wrote a statement that PAOD was "at least as likely as not " caused

by DM2

without any supporting medical evidence. Veteran 's diabetes has been

under

control. HA1c on 4-25-2014 s normal, 5.7%

*************************************************************************

[Berta]

The IMO IME docs did not follow the IMO format properly



I developed this from two IMOs I got from Dr. Craig Bash (a former VA doctor himself so he knows what he is doing)

In his IMOs he also SCed my husbands PAD to his AO DMII which had caused atherosclerosis, caused the PAD.

He sent me a 10 page Curriculum Vitae as well.

You get what you pay for when you get a valid IMO that has a full medical rationale to support the claim.