21-0958 still valid in 2019?

[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

[Berta]

Indeed he did.

My RO sent me a packet regarding my pending CUEs that have to be prepared on a different form.

This is the new "accrued benefit" procedure for survivors... But the forms are still here-because I have an Issue with the IG, District Counsel, and two directors of two different VAROs on this pemise-

In the past the VA made multiple audit errors on my DIC, etc etc to the tune of over 98,000 bucks..

They ignored my requests for proper audit but the Regional Counsel and also OGC ( due to my FTCA settlement , got on them and they paid me.

My AO Nehmer audit clearly states it is an "estimate" and it looks like they forgot many thousands of dollars.

Again. I realised and made this clear to the IG ( it appears they did accept my complaint) that past experience I have had, evident in my c file, tells me it is "more than likely" my audit calculations are correct and theirs are wrong-alleviating the need for me to even pursue the CUEs I have pending.

So--- oddly enough, I recently received a letter that states they have received my claim.

But I did not file it on the new accrued forms yet- maybe they mean the older pending claims they have had for a year.

I have always written my CUEs, never lost one yet-so my advice here is as sound as it can be- using the template I have in the CUE forum and also, in cases whereby I filed the CUE as soon as I got a RO decision, I put Attention to on the Priority envelope and on the letter over the Veterans Administration Regional Office address, by using the alphanumeric that came on the top right hand side of the decision after re: and over my C file #.

That means it goes right back to the idiot who prepared the decision. I got reversals to awards in 3 weeks on three of them.Maybe more than that. 

I know I shoudnt say " idiot "but that AO IHD denial under Nehmer was so ridiculous, and my daughters Chap 35 award for one month- (they reversed in 3 weeks to 7 years and one month.) that I ,in a few words, after noting the regulations they violated, made sure they knew I was appalled by their obvious lack of basic VA 101 knowledge.I charged my director with that as well, in my IG complaint.

Broncovet is so right- we have both been around the VA block for decades. For every step forward they try to make, to attain a better claims system, they find a way to take two steps backwards.

There are MANY here with solid knowledge on CUE. It is the first thing I seek when I see a decision posted here and ,in my case, that goes for every decision I get too.It is far easier to fight any recent CUE in a RO decision, and far less frustrating than having it go to the BVA, where MANY claims should not even be- if the RO had done their job right in the first place. Lots of 38 CFR 4.6  RO errors have caused a tremendous amount of remands.

 

 

 

[broncovet]

Berta posted:

Quote

I have always written my CUEs, never lost one yet-so my advice here is as sound as it can be- using the template I have in the CUE forum and also, in cases whereby I filed the CUE as soon as I got a RO decision, I put Attention to on the Priority envelope and on the letter over the Veterans Administration Regional Office address, by using the alphanumeric that came on the top right hand side of the decision after re: and over my C file #.

That means it goes right back to the idiot who prepared the decision. I got reversals to awards in 3 weeks on three of them.Maybe more than that. 

I missed this in the past.  Especially the part I underlined, above.  Alex, too, explained he had good luck in contacting the decision maker, and asking him to revise the decision.  (This assumes the decision has errors..a plausable assumption!)  

You see, the VA no longer puts the "name" of the decision maker on the decision.  I can kind of get "why", since PTSD (especially) Vets could get pretty mad when he finds out he was denied.  Its not a good idea to have a combat trained Vet boiling mad at you.  

However, Berta has figured out that code number..something like "321xxx" on your decision...is code for the name of the decision maker.  

So, Berta has a great idea, there!!!  By sending it back to the decision maker, (via the code numbers on the decision), you can ask him to revise the decision.  

 

[Berta]

Yes, in my experience, it got right back in front of whoever made the error.

Sec Shulkin used my suggestion to put into M21-1MR, that someone ( probably the Higher Level Reviewer,) should seek a CUE before the decision is even sent out and the VARO has done that in a few claims here over the past year.

I posted the reg change here about a year ago. The numbers identity the specific RO, but the alphas identify whoever made the error.

I miss the olden days when you could actually call up a rater or a C & P doctor but these days that is far more difficult to do. 

I am still poed about my denial under Nehmer-and that tactic above under s CUE got me an award very fast. I mentioned it to the IG and to the director of the  Philadelphia VARO,within my recent request for an audit. I made the point that this person (I gave their alpha identifier to them)could have easily denied many more valid AO survivors claims. But maybe they got educated when they read my CUE.I threw in the violation in a few sentences, and then made a statement to them that was not nice at all. I already posted here why they denied erroneously.It was outrageous.I bet my husband rolled over in his grave.

 

 

[jfrei]

Just want to note there is a date either at the top of the form or the bottom that apparently gives you the validity end date of the form and that was used against me one decision or should I say delay. They had to reopen my claim and send me to another exam even though it was the VA doctor who filled out the damn form and sent it in at the RO... 

[GBArmy]

VA...You just can't make this stuff up. Just keeps on giving and giving...But at least we all know that they always put the veteran first!!!