Jump to content
VA Disability Community via Hadit.com

VA Disability Claims Articles

Ask Your VA Claims Question | Current Forum Posts Search | Rules | View All Forums
VA Disability Articles | Chats and Other Events | Donate | Blogs | New Users

  • hohomepage-banner-2024-2.png

  • 27-year-anniversary-leaderboard.png

    advice-disclaimer.jpg

  • donate-be-a-hero.png

  • 0

CUE process

Rate this question


killab2068

Question

Recommended Posts

  • 0

If they ignored one of the DBQs and that DBQ showed evidence of a better EED, then that is a Violation of 38 CFR 4.6:

"§ 4.6 Evaluation of evidence.

The element of the weight to be accorded the character of the veteran's service is but one factor entering into the considerations of the rating boards in arriving at determinations of the evaluation of disability. Every element in any way affecting the probative value to be assigned to the evidence in each individual claim must be thoroughly and conscientiously studied by each member of the rating board in the light of the established policies of the Department of Veterans Affairs to the end that decisions will be equitable and just as contemplated by the requirements of the law."

 

Can you give us more info......what did the DBQ say as to the most favorable EED and how did they state that?

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 0

killab2068,

Berta is the "queen" of CUE; her advice and sample CUE letter helped me win my case in a matter of weeks.

Talking to all the pros in the area of veteran compensation, I've been told numerous times that the time it took me to win my CUE case was the "fastest" they have ever seen.

Kudos to Berta!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 0

Thanks Allan, the GCY tactic could reduce the backlog because many Remands are actually due to violations of the regs in appealed decisions.

I wrote toSecretary Shulkin, and to President Trump about how a Fast Letter or Directive on this tactic you and I and a few others have used here to get claimants and their POAs aware that they MUST check those decisions carefully within the appeal period and can also get a faster response if CUE exists.

I didn't tell him I call it the Go Cue Yourself tactic.:rolleyes: But in essence that is what it is.

And I mentioned other ways VAROs deliberately deny claims just to get them off their desks.

I had an idea as to the 646s as well- a BIG time waster, and how other errors can be prevented....at the RO level and a long rendition of how VA is hiding their actual malpractice statistics.

The next letter will be more about reducing the backlog,which I was quick to point out,was caused by the ROs, and not by the BVA. 

Pete Hegseth had hundreds of emails from vets and  Sec Shulman answered some this AM from the interview Pete did.

2 were about why it has to be that a vets waits over 30 days or lives further than 40 miles from a VA to get medical care. They are reviewing the Choice Program, for some changes to be made, per the Sec.

 

Edited by Berta
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 0

You're welcome Berta, and as we all know, anything that can reduce the workload of the VA is a plus.

Also, feel free to use me as an example on how a properly executed  CUE can make a world of difference.

 

As a footnote, the Reviewing Officer read the CUE you orchestrated, and in a matter of MICRO seconds, ruled in my favor stating "This has to be the best written, most concise CUE I have ever came across in my 25 years as a VA officer.."

 

 

Edited by allansc2005
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 0

This is what was stated in the decision about the 1st DBQ

"the dbq completed on april 7 2015 documented your skin conditions involved less than 5% of the total body area and less than 5% of exposed areas.  The examiner documented you are treated with oral medications 6weeks or more during the past 12 months."  this is an exact statement.

 

Under Diagnostic Code 7806, a 10 percent rating is warranted  if intermittent systemic therapy such as corticosteroids or other immunosuppressive drugs were required for a total duration of less than six weeks during the past 12-month period. 

A 30 percent rating is warranted if  systemic therapy such as corticosteroids or other immunosuppressive drugs were required for a total duration of six weeks or more, but not constantly, during the past 12-month period.

 A 60 percent rating is warranted if constant or near-constant systemic therapy such as corticosteroids or other immunosuppressive drugs were required during the past 12-month period. 38 C.F.R. § 4.118 , Diagnostic Code 7806.

 

The DBQ that was ignored showed that my disability was compensable starting oct '09 at the 30% rating.  They started the 60% rating from Nov '11.  I want to put in a cue for the 2yrs (Oct '09 to Nov '11).

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 0

Yippee!

It is a violation of 38 CFR 4.6, because they ignored the DBQ and I am sure the DBQ doc backed that up with review of your medical records.

Yes Allan , yours is a great template!

Killab2068,  It sounds great to me!:biggrin:

This is the part of 38 CFR 4.6 that will bite them in the..a..ooops      butt....

"Every element in any way affecting the probative value to be assigned to the evidence in each individual claim must be thoroughly and conscientiously studied by each member of the rating board in the light of the established policies of the Department of Veterans Affairs to the end that decisions will be equitable and just as contemplated by the requirements of the law."

I think these low ball decisions or EED errors many get are deliberate.

All a rater has to do is ignore one good piece of probative evidence and then they hope we will not fight back.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

Guidelines and Terms of Use