Forgot your password?
I just received my DRO SOC for EED on my award from 2013 ulnar nerve entrapment at left wrist, denied!
This condition was first noted on my original claim back in 1992. It was listed under treatment conditions. Now when that claim (1992) was adjudicated it was never mention in the award
I received. So fast forward 2013 i filed a claim for the same condition with the same medical evidence and was awarded 10%. According to M21-1 Part 3 chapter 2 section b, if you list any treatment condition on your claim it is to be treated as a claim for that condition. Can someone please help me with this? It's a cue going back to 1992!
Dont feel like the Lone Ranger. Its been pointed out that the DRO pretty much denies all EED claims especially when talking 5 and six figure retros.
Can you post the reasons and bases, covering your private information? Is this a new claim or claim for increase?
You are gonna have to file the I9, appeal to BVA, but, you want to address the R and B for both the SOC and the original EED denial. What was the reason they gave that they denied your earlier date?
To add, if you want specific help with your specific claim, then you have to give specific reasons and bases.
If you want "general" help on effective date appeals, I can point you to the regulations on effective dates. Generally, your effective date will be the later of the date you applied or facts found. (The date the doc said you were disabled).
Current through Pub. L. 114-38. (See Public Laws for the current Congress.)
Thanks broncovet! I have to work on getting the information on here. I have to figure out how to do it.
The reason they said they denied the EED is because they said I didn't file a claim for left wrist ulnar nerve and that I only claim Sarcoidosis.
This was before the Claims Assistance Act of 2000.
What was the law back in 92? Specifically, did they have a duty to develop an inferred claim?
EED's are tough. The Veterans benefit manual is about 50 pages on just effective dates. Many times the Veteran has to prove CUE, a higher standard of review to win an EED. And, pwrslm is exactly correct that a CUE has to be based on laws AT THE TIME, to be CUE. A change in regulations is not CUE.
As far as the laws in 1992, you should read what NVLSP has to say about inferred claims:
For EED issues, the Veteran should consider taking his file to a competent Veterans law attorney especially if there is a big retro involved. Make no mistake. The VA fights Veterans "to the death" before they write a 6 or even 5 figure retro check.
You posted: "they said they denied the EED is because they said I didn't file a claim for left wrist ulnar nerve and that I only claim Sarcoidosis."
I call "BS" on the VA's reasons for denying your EED. YOu should jump on those reasons and bases and appeal if you have not already.
Here is why:
(from the NVLSP link I posted, above)
"CAVC stated that a claimant sufficiently identifies the benefit sought “by referring to a body part or system that is disabled or by describing symptoms of the disability.”
Its just not true the Veteran is expected to understand the difference between "left wrist ulnar nerve" and sarcidosis. The Veteran should be able to point to his left wrist and say, "it hurts and I want benefits for it", and not be required to self diagnose his sarcidosis.
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Already have an account? Sign in here.