Mr cue Posted July 30, 2018 Share Posted July 30, 2018 https://veteranclaims.wordpress.com/tag/131-32-2011-38-cfr-3-157b-informal-claim-claim-defined/ Ok the bva citation number is 0928705 Ok I believe they should have iffer a smc claim when I got my award it was never done. I had lost of use of hand &elbow Which is m1\2 rating. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
0 Berta Posted July 30, 2018 Share Posted July 30, 2018 Here is the Remand: https://www.va.gov/vetapp09/files4/0928705.txt In part: ":4. The October 2007 claim of CUE in the June 1994 decision addresses issues currently pending on appeal. CONCLUSIONS OF LAW 1. The Veteran's appeal as to the issue of CUE in the denial of service connection for a left elbow disability is dismissed as no justiciable case or controversy is before the Board at this time. 38 U.S.C.A. §§ 5109A, 7104, 7105 (West 2002); 38 C.F.R. §§ 3.105, 19.4, 20.101, 20.200 (2008). 2. The Veteran's appeal as to the issue of CUE in the assignment of an initial 10 percent rating for a left neck muscle strain is dismissed as no justiciable case or controversy is before the Board at this time. 38 U.S.C.A. §§ 5109A, 7104, 7105 (West 2002); 38 C.F.R. §§ 3.105, 19.4, 20.101, 20.200 (2008)." And: "ORDER The question of whether a June 1994 rating decision granting service connection for a muscle strain of the left neck, rated 10 percent under Diagnostic Code 5233, contains CUE is dismissed. The question of whether a June 1994 rating decision denying service connection for a left elbow disability contains CUE is dismissed. REMAND As was discussed above, the Veteran has timely perfected appeals with regard to the issues of service connection for a left elbow disability and initial evaluation of a left neck muscle strain. During the pendency of these appeals, the VCAA was enacted. VA has a duty to notify and assist claimants in substantiating a claim for VA benefits. 38 U.S.C.A. §§ 5100, 5102, 5103, 5103A, 5107, 5126; 38 C.F.R. §§ 3.102, 3.156(a), 3.159 and 3.326(a). Adequate notice and assistance has not been afforded the Veteran under the VCAA with regard to either claim, and hence remand is required. Accordingly, the case is REMANDED for the following action: (Please note, this appeal has been advanced on the Board's docket pursuant to 38 C.F.R. § 20.900(c) (2008). Expedited handling is requested.) 1. Provide the Veteran with the notice required under 38 U.S.C.A. § 5103(a) and 38 C.F.R. § 3.159(b), as well as Court precedent, to include Dingess v. Nicholson, 19 Vet. App. 473 (2006) (regarding notice of assignment of effective dates and disability evaluations). 2. The AMC/RO should specifically request private medical records regarding treatment of the left elbow and arm disability from the time of injury to service, or proper releases to allow VA to obtain such on the Veteran's behalf. The RO should review the claims file to ensure that all the foregoing requested development is completed, and arrange for any additional development indicated, to include provision of VA examinations. 3. The RO should then readjudicate the claims on appeal. If any benefit sought remains denied, the RO should issue an appropriate SSOC and provide the Veteran and his representative the requisite time period to respond. The case should then be returned to the Board for further appellate review, if otherwise in order. No action is required of the appellant unless he is notified. " Can you tell us what service connected disabilities you have now and what is the rating for each one? GRADUATE ! Nov 2nd 2007 American Military University ! When thousands of Americans faced annihilation in the 1800s Chief Osceola's response to his people, the Seminoles, was simply "They(the US Army)have guns, but so do we." Sameo to us -They (VA) have 38 CFR ,38 USC, and M21-1- but so do we. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
0 Mr cue Posted July 30, 2018 Author Share Posted July 30, 2018 4 minutes ago, Berta said: Here is the Remand: https://www.va.gov/vetapp09/files4/0928705.txt In part: ":4. The October 2007 claim of CUE in the June 1994 decision addresses issues currently pending on appeal. CONCLUSIONS OF LAW 1. The Veteran's appeal as to the issue of CUE in the denial of service connection for a left elbow disability is dismissed as no justiciable case or controversy is before the Board at this time. 38 U.S.C.A. §§ 5109A, 7104, 7105 (West 2002); 38 C.F.R. §§ 3.105, 19.4, 20.101, 20.200 (2008). 2. The Veteran's appeal as to the issue of CUE in the assignment of an initial 10 percent rating for a left neck muscle strain is dismissed as no justiciable case or controversy is before the Board at this time. 38 U.S.C.A. §§ 5109A, 7104, 7105 (West 2002); 38 C.F.R. §§ 3.105, 19.4, 20.101, 20.200 (2008)." And: "ORDER The question of whether a June 1994 rating decision granting service connection for a muscle strain of the left neck, rated 10 percent under Diagnostic Code 5233, contains CUE is dismissed. The question of whether a June 1994 rating decision denying service connection for a left elbow disability contains CUE is dismissed. REMAND As was discussed above, the Veteran has timely perfected appeals with regard to the issues of service connection for a left elbow disability and initial evaluation of a left neck muscle strain. During the pendency of these appeals, the VCAA was enacted. VA has a duty to notify and assist claimants in substantiating a claim for VA benefits. 38 U.S.C.A. §§ 5100, 5102, 5103, 5103A, 5107, 5126; 38 C.F.R. §§ 3.102, 3.156(a), 3.159 and 3.326(a). Adequate notice and assistance has not been afforded the Veteran under the VCAA with regard to either claim, and hence remand is required. Accordingly, the case is REMANDED for the following action: (Please note, this appeal has been advanced on the Board's docket pursuant to 38 C.F.R. § 20.900(c) (2008). Expedited handling is requested.) 1. Provide the Veteran with the notice required under 38 U.S.C.A. § 5103(a) and 38 C.F.R. § 3.159(b), as well as Court precedent, to include Dingess v. Nicholson, 19 Vet. App. 473 (2006) (regarding notice of assignment of effective dates and disability evaluations). 2. The AMC/RO should specifically request private medical records regarding treatment of the left elbow and arm disability from the time of injury to service, or proper releases to allow VA to obtain such on the Veteran's behalf. The RO should review the claims file to ensure that all the foregoing requested development is completed, and arrange for any additional development indicated, to include provision of VA examinations. 3. The RO should then readjudicate the claims on appeal. If any benefit sought remains denied, the RO should issue an appropriate SSOC and provide the Veteran and his representative the requisite time period to respond. The case should then be returned to the Board for further appellate review, if otherwise in order. No action is required of the appellant unless he is notified. " Can you tell us what service connected disabilities you have now and what is the rating for each one? 4 minutes ago, Berta said: Here is the Remand: https://www.va.gov/vetapp09/files4/0928705.txt In part: ":4. The October 2007 claim of CUE in the June 1994 decision addresses issues currently pending on appeal. CONCLUSIONS OF LAW 1. The Veteran's appeal as to the issue of CUE in the denial of service connection for a left elbow disability is dismissed as no justiciable case or controversy is before the Board at this time. 38 U.S.C.A. §§ 5109A, 7104, 7105 (West 2002); 38 C.F.R. §§ 3.105, 19.4, 20.101, 20.200 (2008). 2. The Veteran's appeal as to the issue of CUE in the assignment of an initial 10 percent rating for a left neck muscle strain is dismissed as no justiciable case or controversy is before the Board at this time. 38 U.S.C.A. §§ 5109A, 7104, 7105 (West 2002); 38 C.F.R. §§ 3.105, 19.4, 20.101, 20.200 (2008)." And: "ORDER The question of whether a June 1994 rating decision granting service connection for a muscle strain of the left neck, rated 10 percent under Diagnostic Code 5233, contains CUE is dismissed. The question of whether a June 1994 rating decision denying service connection for a left elbow disability contains CUE is dismissed. REMAND As was discussed above, the Veteran has timely perfected appeals with regard to the issues of service connection for a left elbow disability and initial evaluation of a left neck muscle strain. During the pendency of these appeals, the VCAA was enacted. VA has a duty to notify and assist claimants in substantiating a claim for VA benefits. 38 U.S.C.A. §§ 5100, 5102, 5103, 5103A, 5107, 5126; 38 C.F.R. §§ 3.102, 3.156(a), 3.159 and 3.326(a). Adequate notice and assistance has not been afforded the Veteran under the VCAA with regard to either claim, and hence remand is required. Accordingly, the case is REMANDED for the following action: (Please note, this appeal has been advanced on the Board's docket pursuant to 38 C.F.R. § 20.900(c) (2008). Expedited handling is requested.) 1. Provide the Veteran with the notice required under 38 U.S.C.A. § 5103(a) and 38 C.F.R. § 3.159(b), as well as Court precedent, to include Dingess v. Nicholson, 19 Vet. App. 473 (2006) (regarding notice of assignment of effective dates and disability evaluations). 2. The AMC/RO should specifically request private medical records regarding treatment of the left elbow and arm disability from the time of injury to service, or proper releases to allow VA to obtain such on the Veteran's behalf. The RO should review the claims file to ensure that all the foregoing requested development is completed, and arrange for any additional development indicated, to include provision of VA examinations. 3. The RO should then readjudicate the claims on appeal. If any benefit sought remains denied, the RO should issue an appropriate SSOC and provide the Veteran and his representative the requisite time period to respond. The case should then be returned to the Board for further appellate review, if otherwise in order. No action is required of the appellant unless he is notified. " Can you tell us what service connected disabilities you have now and what is the rating for each one? After every thing was done I was iu 60% ivds neck& 20% for a facture elbow with parthisis of the hand. Now I find about smc claims I should of got a k for my loss of use of hand. I wish i could get the court decision on worldpress to show. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
0 Berta Posted July 30, 2018 Share Posted July 30, 2018 Gee, I lost my reply yulookin' I do remember you now. I dont understand this: "i was granted 60% and iu 2001 by the dro." Is the IU solely for the 60% condition? GRADUATE ! Nov 2nd 2007 American Military University ! When thousands of Americans faced annihilation in the 1800s Chief Osceola's response to his people, the Seminoles, was simply "They(the US Army)have guns, but so do we." Sameo to us -They (VA) have 38 CFR ,38 USC, and M21-1- but so do we. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
0 Mr cue Posted July 30, 2018 Author Share Posted July 30, 2018 That is the old case I won they grant. iu because I hadnt work. But they stage rate me for the neck 20%1993 till 2001 which was bull Let it go to court that is the decision on WordPress if some one can show that maybe u will understand better. Plus I feel it may other Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
0 Mr cue Posted July 30, 2018 Author Share Posted July 30, 2018 HesterA_10-3072.pdf this is the court case. I am now fight for smc and I believe I am goin to get it back till 1993. This is the new fight. I wasn't aware an of smc an it should have been look at. Never done that a cue The claim should have been iffer when I was grant iu by cfr. An every iu or 100% granted should have a denial on the decision for smc if not fight for your date. If u look u Can see I have loss of use of hand and elbow. Which is m1/2. Now I would get a smc I for a&a If u quilfy for two different smc I or higher I are to get r1 by cfr. I just post the smc handbook take a look it might help some one Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
0 63SIERRA Posted July 30, 2018 Share Posted July 30, 2018 what regulation in 38cfr says that SMC should be inferred when winning a TDIU claim. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Question
Mr cue
https://veteranclaims.wordpress.com/tag/131-32-2011-38-cfr-3-157b-informal-claim-claim-defined/
Ok the bva citation number is 0928705
Ok I believe they should have iffer a smc claim when I got my award it was never done.
I had lost of use of hand &elbow
Which is m1\2 rating.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Top Posters For This Question
4
3
2
Popular Days
Jul 30
9
Top Posters For This Question
Mr cue 4 posts
63SIERRA 3 posts
Berta 2 posts
Popular Days
Jul 30 2018
9 posts
8 answers to this question
Recommended Posts
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 accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now