REVISION 2 MDD / Anxiety CUE

[Justaskpat]

In 2011 I was denied SC for MDD. In 2019 I was approved SC for MDD. I've done a "request for decision review" for the 2019 to ask the % be raised from 50% to 70% and I've done a CUE on the 2011 denial. I'm attaching those 2 documents along with a page of evidence (my notes) regarding the 2011 C&P. Please tell me what you think, if I need to add, delete edit anything. All comments will be greatly appreciated.

Uploaded 2ND REVISION MDD/Anxiety CUE. Appreciate any and all suggestions, comments etc. Thank you

10/1/2019 *this revision still needs some work. Will post new thread when CUE revision is ready.

 

REVISION 2 ANXIETY CUE.pdf

Edited October 1, 2019 by Justaskpat
addendum 10/1/2019 *this revision still needs some work. Will post new thread when CUE revision is ready.

[Berta]

I  think the MDD CUE is a beauty!

But I think you should just stick to the facts re: 38 CFR 4.6 and the SMRs that they had in 2011 and failed to consider. Others will chime in on the statements as to the way they manipulated the C & P exam.

It appears that they did consider the SMRs for the 50% award-but

the request for a higher rating should be filed separately from the CUE. (some of these raters  can barely read as it is)

You should state at the bottom of the CUE that  their legal error in 2011 manifested an altered outcome to your detriment.

Then again I had a CUE basis in 1996 when I got an outrageous statement in a posthumous C & P exam.

I probably would have gone into details about it in a CUE  -but I didnt file CUE-

I called the examiner and raised hell with him only to learn that the RO had withheld from him, my most probative evidence - my husband's 6 page autopsy- all of that was resolved when I won my FTCA wrongful death claim within a few more months.( my RO also had withheld this autopsy from the OGC when they wanted my files, and even from the top VA cardio doctor, whose opinion, when I faxed them the autopsy fully supported my 1151 and FTCA claim.) 

I guess my point is to keep this CUE short and sweet-(well none of mine have been  sweet) and I do like the way you have rebutted the C & P exam...but their main error is the violation of 38 CFR 4.6.

We have some great members here who understand CUE.

 

 

[Justaskpat]

3 hours ago, Berta said:

But I think you should just stick to the facts re: 38 CFR 4.6 and the SMRs that they had in 2011 and failed to consider. Others will chime in on the statements as to the way they manipulated the C & P exam.

Appreciated your comments Berta. does this mean that in the CUE, I should not point specifically to the problem, but instead just say there was an error / violation, etc, and then either let them find it or could I attach the specifics as "evidence" along with the SMRs?

[Justaskpat]

8 hours ago, Berta said:

the request for a higher rating should be filed separately from the CUE. (some of these raters  can barely read as it is)

The mention of "rating should be 70%" in the 2011 CUE is referring only to the 2011 decision. It sounds like it confuses things so I probably shouldn't have put it in. The request for increased rate of 70% for the 2019 decision will be in a separate document on a different form, uploaded separately. From what I understand, I have to use 2 completely different forms because the rules for disagreeing with a decision changed in Feb 2019.

[Justaskpat]

On 9/7/2019 at 12:15 PM, Berta said:

I think you should just stick to the facts

Hi Berta. I just uploaded a new, hopefully improved revision for MDD/Anxiety.  If/when you might have the time, I'd appreciate you taking a look. Thank you

[Oceanbound]

The new one looks good, file away.

[GeekySquid]

13 hours ago, Justaskpat said:

I just uploaded a new, hopefully improved revision for MDD/Anxiety.

i will jump in and suggest that you look at the other suggestions on your other cue's and apply them to the format of this one also.