Jump to content
  • veteranscrisisline-badge-chat-1.gif

  • Advertisemnt

  • Trouble Remembering? This helped me.

    I have memory problems and as some of you may know I highly recommend Evernote and have for years. Though I've found that writing helps me remember more. I ran across Tom's videos on youtube, I'm a bit geeky and I also use an IPad so if you take notes on your IPad or you are thinking of going paperless check it out. I'm really happy with it, I use it with a program called Noteshelf 2.

    Click here to purchase your digital journal. HadIt.com receives a commission on each purchase.

  • 14 Questions about VA Disability Compensation Benefits Claims

    questions-001@3x.png

    When a Veteran starts considering whether or not to file a VA Disability Claim, there are a lot of questions that he or she tends to ask. Over the last 10 years, the following are the 14 most common basic questions I am asked about ...
    Continue Reading
     
  • Ads

  • Most Common VA Disabilities Claimed for Compensation:   

    tinnitus-005.pngptsd-005.pnglumbosacral-005.pngscars-005.pnglimitation-flexion-knee-005.pngdiabetes-005.pnglimitation-motion-ankle-005.pngparalysis-005.pngdegenerative-arthitis-spine-005.pngtbi-traumatic-brain-injury-005.png

  • Advertisemnt

  • VA Watchdog

  • Advertisemnt

  • Ads

  • Can a 100 percent Disabled Veteran Work and Earn an Income?

    employment 2.jpeg

    You’ve just been rated 100% disabled by the Veterans Affairs. After the excitement of finally having the rating you deserve wears off, you start asking questions. One of the first questions that you might ask is this: It’s a legitimate question – rare is the Veteran that finds themselves sitting on the couch eating bon-bons … Continue reading


  • 0
Sign in to follow this  
mytime34

VA Found/Approved a CUE, but Effective Date is Wrong

Question

Hello All,

Break down of my ratings over the years

2000 - 10% Degenerative Miniscus Bilateral & 10% Tinitus
2007 - Increase for knees from 10% to 20% due to VA mistake of ratings both knees together
2010 - 0% lower back, as a secondary to my knee problems
2011 - 20% lower back increase, due to evidence of range of motion and herniated discs, retroactive to 2010 (Once again VA did not review all the evidence)
(40% rated)
2016 - 20% left knee, 20% right knee, 10% left leg sciatica, 10% right leg sciatica
I am now 70% rated, still waiting for the SOC to be released (but there are still 6 claims that have not been completed)

The letter from the VA states Clear and Unmistakable errors is found in the evaluation of the Degen Arthritis of the Left & Right knee, due to locking, pain and effusion.
The retroactive increase of 20% is established on May 1 2013 (Left Knee) and Jun 11, 2013 (Right knee)
This is where the first issue is, the right knees date is incorrect as they used the last time I filed for a knee increase claim (denied of course), but the dates are still wrong. The Jun 11, 2013 is when I had surgery on my knee and was 100% rated during that month.
The locking, pain and effusion have been stated during every C&P exam and is in every SOC dating back to 2000.
I have filed a NOD for Effective Date and supplied all medical reports, VA visits, C&P exams back to 2000 and have asked for the Effective date to be Feb 20, 2000.

If the VA finds a CUE on their own, does that help my case in the Effective Date NOD?
Is there a cutoff on how far back the VA can retroactive a disability?


Finally received the Final Decision and case is now closed.

20% Degenerative Disc Disease of the Lumbar Spine 5242
20% Deg Arthritus of the Right Knee 5010-5258
20% Deg Arthritus of the Left Knee 5010-5258
20% Deg tears, posterior horn of the medial menisci, bilateral knees 5257-5010
10% Radiclopathy (Sciatica) Right extremity 8520
10% Radiclopathy (Sciatica) Left extremity 8520
10% Tinnitus 6260
0% Residual scar, left knee surgival debrigement 7805

70% rated

I just filed my NOD for an earlier effective date, due to the CUE (Clear and Unmistakable Error) that the VA found during my claim review. CUE was found due to "locking, pain and effusion of the L/R knee)
Because of the CUE they set the effective dates of Feb 2013 & May 2013 (Right and Left knee), but the RO should have reviewed all of my filings and original approval of 1/25/1999.
Each one of the reviews and documented notes states Locking, popping, swelling, instability and pain.
I also called the VA today to see what the next steps were and the lady told me to file the NOD and she was sending a request for review of the CUE effective dates.

Also the VA did not evaluate my Bilateral Hip Condition, which was part of the claim (that is now closed).

Has anyone else had the VA find a CUE? Was it in your favor or theirs? Did you get an earlier effective date?

Thank you

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Recommended Posts

  • 0

Not on a cue.It goes back to the date the claim was filed.

 

J

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
  • 0

 I agree with John And

VCAA are not applicable where CUE is 
claimed

your basicly on your own filing CUE

However the board can remand back to RO  & RO issues a SSOC...Usually a Denial of EED & Then they give Reasons & Bases Why

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
  • 0

Here is the breakdown of my ratings over the years.

The retroactive date is not based upon the claim I filed on 4/28/2016, they went back to my June 11, 2013 claim (which was closed and no appeal filed)

 

10% Deg arthritis Bilateral   (Records and reports show locking, popping, swelling)1/25/1999 - 2/20/2000

(20%)10% Deg arth Bilateral & 10% Tinnitus  (2nd time filing for knee issue and increase with records and reports showing locking & swelling) 2/20/2000 - 2/7/2002

(30%) 10% Deg arth Left knee & 10% Deg Arth right knee (Error found by VA that my knees should have been rated separately)(reports and records still show locking, swelling, pain), 10% Tinnitus 2/27/2000 - 6/29/2011

(40%) 10% Deg Arth Left knee, 10% Deg Arth right knee, 10% Tinnitus & 10% Lower back Deg Arth (increase request for knees due to locking, pain and swelling, denied) 6/29/2011 - 4/28/2016

(70%) 20% Deg Arth Left Knee (CUE found due to locking, pain, swelling), 20% Deg Arth Right knee (CUE found due to locking, pain, swelling), 20% Degenerative Tears, posterior horn medial menisci Bilat knees, 20% Degen Disc diseas lumbar spine, 10% Radiculopathy (Sciatica Nerve) left extremity, 10% Radiculopathy (Sciatica Nerve) right extremity, 10% Tinnitus, 0% Residual Scar, left knee surgery.  4/28/2016 - Present
(CUE for the left & right knee was effective back to Feb 2016 (right knee) & May 2016 (Left knee) as this was the last time I filed for a review of my knees and an increase it was denied.

Every C&P exam that I have had for my bilat knees (1999,2000, 2002, 2003, 2005, 2007, 2009, 2011, 2013, 2016) I have stated that I have locking, pain, swelling, instability, weakness and popping). This is why I am stating that the CUE should go back to the original approval date of 1/25/1999.

I have only filed 2 appeals over the last 20yrs as I was tired of the processes, but they were in the beginning of my first claims.
The CUE was not the result of an appeal or anything like that, it was just found out of the blue by the VA.
Here is the exact wording of the CUE (Left and right knee were given the same answer)

(Left knee)
An evaluation of 20% is granted whenever the semilunar cartilage is dislocated with frequent episodes of "locking, " pain and effusion into the joint.

Clear and unmistakable errors are errors that are undebatable, so that it can be said that reasonable minds could only conclude that the previous decision was fatally flawed at the time it was made. A determination that there was a clear and inmistakable error must be based on the record  and the law that existed at the time of the prior decision. Once a determination is made that there was a clear and unmistakable error in a prior decision that would change the outcome, then the decision must be revisied to conform to what the decision should have been. In this case the retroactive incrase for degenerative arthritis of the left knee S/P medical meniscus debrigement, (previously evaluated as posterior horn of the medial menisci and DC 5010-5260) is granted as the previous evaluation decision was a clear and unmistakable error.

A clear and unmistakable error is found in the evaluation of the degenerative arthritis of the left knee s/p medical menisci debridement and a retroactive increased evaluation to 20% disabling is established from May 1, 2013. A review of your claim  and VA examination dated June 11, 2013, showed that your right knee should have been evaluated as a meniscal tear with frequent episodes of locking, pain and effusion into the joint. There was no limitation of range of motion, nor objective evidence of painful movement of the knee.

(Right Knee)
An evaluation of 20% is granted whenever the semilunar cartilage is dislocated with frequent episodes of "locking, " pain and effusion into the joint.

Clear and unmistakable errors are errors that are undebatable, so that it can be said that reasonable minds could only conclude that the previous decision was fatally flawed at the time it was made. A determination that there was a clear and inmistakable error must be based on the record  and the law that existed at the time of the prior decision. Once a determination is made that there was a clear and unmistakable error in a prior decision that would change the outcome, then the decision must be revisied to conform to what the decision should have been. In this case the retroactive increase for degenerative arthritis of the left knee S/P medical meniscus debrigement, (previously evaluated as posterior horn of the medial menisci and DC 5010-5260) is granted as the previous evaluation decision was a clear and unmistakable error.

A clear and unmistakable error is found in the evaluation of the degenerative arthritis of the right knee claimed as bursitis, tendonitis and arthritis and a retroactive increased evaluation to 20% disabling is established from Feb 6, 2013. A clear and unmistakable error (CUE) is an error that is undebatable so that reasonable minds could not differ. A determination of the CUE must be based on the record and the law that existed at the time of the prior decision. Such error must have been prejudicial to the claimant. Once the determination is made that there was a CUE in a prior decision that would change the outcome of that decision that decision must be corrected so as if the former error had not been made. A review of your claim  and VA examination dated June 11, 2013, showed that your left knee should have been evaluated as a meniscal tear with frequent episodes of locking, pain and effusion into the joint. There was no limitation of range of motion, nor objective evidence of painful movement of the knee.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
  • 0

Yes, Yes, and Yes to your 3 CUE questions, which I think I put in our CUE forum., except the VA didnt find them, I did and they concurred.

"Has anyone else had the VA find a CUE? Was it in your favor or theirs? Did you get an earlier effective date?" 
 

 

but the RO should have reviewed all of my filings and original approval of 1/25/1999. "

Was the CUE filed specifically on that 1999 decision too?

Edited by Berta

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
  • 0

I never filed a CUE, I had no idea what a CUE was until Sept 13, 2016

The VA found the CUE during their review of my 4/28/16 claim.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Answer this question...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Sign in to follow this  

  • Similar Content

    • By TropicLightning125
      First I'd like to thank all of you for the great assistance you provide! I'm a long time lurker but finally created an account to post this question to the experts today.
      Background:
      - Discharged from active duty in September 2000
      - Participated in a "VA Pilot Program" where you sat with a VA clerk during out-processing to determine any potential disability claims, which were then submitted by the clerk for you.
      - In Jan 2001, received a decision letter with the following rating, back dated to my date of discharge: "Service connection for degenerative disease of low back has been established as directly related to military service. An evaluation of 10 percent is assigned under diagnostic code 5293. An evaluation of 10 percent is assigned if there are mild symptoms associated with intervertebral disc syndrome."
      Fast forward to 2018. I experienced a herniated L4-L5 disc and had a (mostly unsuccessful) discectomy . I applied for an increase for my Degenerative Disease of the lower back and for radiculopathy of the sciatic nerve in both legs. My claim was closed in October 2019 with no increase for the Degenerative Disc Disease (a story for another time, but a bad C&P was involved and I've already filed a supplemental), and new secondary ratings for the radiculopathy: 10% Left Leg and 10% Right Leg back dated to my 2018 surgery and the right leg increased for some unknown reason to 20% on the date of my (bad) C&P exam in August 2019.
      My question:
      In reviewing my original 2000 claim decision letter today, I found this statement listed under FACTS: "MRI findings have revealed degenerative changes and degenerative disc disease of the lumbar spine. EMG studies have revealed mild chronic recurrent L-4 root irritation."
      Keep in mind, at the time of discharge I was only rated for the Degenerative Disc Disease, not any leg/nerve issues, though it is clear from my Service Medical Records I also had recurring leg pain and numbness.
      Is it odd that they literally called out the EMG results in my rating decision but did not grant an award for Sciatic Paralysis/Neuralgia/Radiculopathy back in 2000? Based on the current schedule (http://www.militarydisabilitymadeeasy.com/lowernerves.html) I think the "mild chronic recurrent L-4 root irritation" would have granted a rating of 10% for incomplete partial paralysis (8520) and/or neuralgia (8720). But...did these codes even exist back in 2000? I certainly was not aware or told that the nerve/leg pain was a separate rating. How would I even go about finding out if these diagnostic codes existed in 2000?
      In the event there was a rating available for this back in 2000, would this be something that would be eligible for a CUE? Obviously after almost 20 years I'm well outside the window to appeal the decision, but I feel the clear unmistakable evidence is right in the VA's own decision letter, and 20 years of an additional 10% rating makes this worth my time and energy.
      Thanks again for all you do!
    • By Sherminater
      Hello fellow Vets!
      I recognize it’s a lot to read... It’s my first time making a blog post and I want to be clear and get solid and knowledgable responses from y’all. Thanks in advance!!
      History... Filed a claim for VA disability benefits April 2013. Hand delivered over 200 documents in support of my claim to the Houston VA office in January 2014 (prior to a decision letter on my claim). Decision letter received in March 2014. Failed to achieve a rating above zero percent on any of the disabilities claimed and no service connection for Major Depressive Disorder(MDD). 
      The documents I filed at the VA were date stamped Jan 8, 2014 and included the only records I had in support of this claim, especially for the MDD.
       
      Fast forward... Intent to File submitted in August 1, 2018 (at my attorneys direction). His office then submitted a supplemental (including 16 pages of the very same supporting documents that I submitted to the VA in 2014) on the 364th day. 
       
      Well,  that supplemental got me appointments with two different C&P professionals and resulted in a combined rating of 70% (10% knee and 70% MDD) effective July 30, 2019. The same VA documents filed by me in 2014 and (fewer) mailed with the supplemental were recently reviewed at my C&P exam by the psychologist conducting the interview. He asked for my help to show him any document in my file that made it clear and unmistakable that my MDD was/is service connected. It took all of thirty seconds to search his computer with my VA records on it to locate a document from my psychiatrist and head of psychiatry at my last duty station. These are the very same documents which were in the VA’s possession prior to my initial claim attempted in 2013/2014. Meaning there is NO new or compelling evidence!
      Question 1 - So why did they schedule (allow) these appointments and the case to be reopened with no new and/or relevant evidence? 
      Question 2 - Why was it right (or was it) for my attorney to file a supplemental (vs. just filing for a new claim)? At least with a new claim I may have been able to receive (the 11 or so months of) backpay from the Intent to File date.
      It seems the supplemental has NO benefit over just requesting to open a new claim. Or is it not allowed for veterans to file a new claim for any previously claimed ailment(s)?
      Question 3 - Is it a fact that the VA made a clear and unmistakable error with regard to no service connection for MDD?
      ... by not reviewing those documents which were right in front of them? And if the documents prove the date they were filed, isn’t it undeniable? And if I am now rated at 70%....
      Question 4 - Shouldn’t this be one of those CUE cases that should/could be potentially won for backpay to April 2013?
      This is the first time they scheduled me for ANY C&P appointments for any reason ever. Yet, this is at least the third attempt at filing a VA disability claim.
       
      Question 5 - What makes the VA decide for or against these C&P exam appointments?
       
       
    • By J McB
      Note: My claim(s) are under Legacy Appeals
      I received a Rating Decision where the VA acknowledges CUE, though I didn't claim CUE, but the decision admits CUE...
      I did write in my NOD supporting statement, "NYCRO committed unmistakable egregious errors when they closed my 2016 claims," but nothing about claiming 'Clear and Unmistakable Error(s)'.
      So then, I'm feeling like this CUE claim by the VA is some...thing they've done to put a halt on that component of my claim...which is retroactive for TDIU...
      In my SOC appeal I took the route of "I dunno" 🙃 lay person filing appeal and posed the question under footnote noting something along the lines that 38CFR doesn't say (or least I couldn't find anything) about a CUE itself being a CUE...
      Questions,
      1. I didn't claim CUE but the VA did, how do I respond accordingly? 
      2. Are they trying to put the kabash/narrow my options for their not processing TDIU retroactive?
       
    • By Vync
      Hello everyone,
      I have been chewing on this one for quite a while and believe this final draft CUE is ready to be submitted to the VA. The decision maker failed to follow the laws in effect at the time. No judgement call factors.
      Please feel free to tear it apart and offer any suggestions. I wanted to keep it down to about two pages, explain the error, include excerpts from evidence, and include laws in effect at the time.
       
       
       
       
       
    • By Justaskpat
      I was all set to use the 21-0958 for for my NOD when I happened to notice the decision I am disagreeing with said to use 21-0995. I looked up 21-0995 and it said it's the "new and improved" faster response form. If there is such a thing as a "faster response" form, I'd like to use it. The 20-0995 makes it sound as if it can be used for both CUE and NOD. I need to submit multiple of both and I don't want to screw it up. Have any of you use this form? thanks
  • Ads

  • Our picks

    • Need your support - T-shirts Available - Please buy a mug or a membership
      if you have been thinking about subscribing to an ad-free forum or buying a mug now would a very helpful time to do that.

      Thank you for your support
        • Like
      • 18 replies
    • OK everyone thanks for all the advice I need your help I called VSO complained about length of time on Wednesday of this week today I checked my E benefits and my ratings are in for my ankles that they were denying me 10% for each bilateral which makes 21% I was originally 80% now they’re still saying I’m 80% 

      I’m 50% pes planus 30% migraine headaches 20% lumbar 10% tinnitus and now bilateral 21% so 10% left and right ankle Can someone else please do the math because I come up with 86% which makes me 90 what am I missing please help and thank you
    • I was denied SC for IBS and GERD IN 2011. In 2019 I was awarded SC for GERD. This CUE  is for 2011, both GERD and IBS. There are some odd aspects regarding the 2011 decision, the way it was written and the C&P report and the way it was written. I've tried to present this as clearly as I can. Note: the decision contradicts itself. the decision also contradicts the C&P Report. Honestly, I think the rater just got confused because the C&P was so poorly written. *THIS CUE HAS NOT YET BEEN SUBMITTED*Please let me know what you think. Appreciate all comments and suggestions. Thanks.

       

      VA RATING DECISION MARCH 23 2011 GERD IBS.pdf C P REPORT 7312010 GERD IBS.pdf GERD IBS CUE 2011(1).pdf

      C P ADDENDUM REQUEST RE DIAGNOSIS 7232010.pdf
      • 56 replies
    • 14 Questions about VA Disability Compensation Benefits Claims
      When a Veteran starts considering whether or not to file a Veterans Affairs Disability Claim, there are a lot of questions that he or she tends to ask. Over the last 10 years, the following are the 14 most common basic questions I am asked about when it comes to filing Veterans Affairs Disability Claims. [Reprinted here with permission from Veterans Law Blog]
      • 0 replies
    • Disabled Veterans Property Tax Exemptions by State
      Alabama 
      A disabled veteran in Alabama may receive a full property tax exemption on his/her primary residence if the veteran is 100 percent disabled as a result of service and has a net annual income of $12,000 or less.
      • 0 replies
  • Ads

  • Popular Contributors

  • Ad

  • Latest News
×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

{terms] and Guidelines