CUE question (I asked this question in AMA)

[Miken2c74]

I have a question and I hope someone chimes in. After talking with DAV yesterday something rung in my ear and I chewed on it for a while actually it kept me up last night (which leads me to this question). The VSO stated that VA gave more probative weight to evidence received from one doctor's office (American Medical Center not a VARO or  government entity) over another because the one in question had access to my C_File and Virtual (VA Records). I know this to be a clear error because this doctor's office is a German doctor's office with English speaking receptionist and doctors, and pay local German taxes. The doctor's office is in business to cater to Americans living and working overseas in Germany and they process the German bills through the patients health insurance not VA. They do not have access to Veterans c-file (sometimes not even then) unless they have a VA initiated C&P exam. I have been to this doctor's office and the service is so lala, I used the medical files(with my personal STRs) from this office in my evidence when I went to the Orthopedic Surgeon and ask her if it was possible for her to perform a thorough exam of my feet and knees. So I believe that this was error in assumption because the name of the doctor's office rendered a out for a possible denial. Is this grounds for a CUE, I am really interested in you guys thoughts.

Edited September 20, 2019 by Miken2c74
add tags

[Miken2c74]

So I wrote something please tell me what you think.

Michael A Hunter letter.docx

[GeekySquid]

4 hours ago, Miken2c74 said:

So I wrote something please tell me what you think.

Michael A Hunter letter.docx 16.04 kB · 1 download

1) don't include your name or personal identifying information on the Internet. Not that someone here will use it, but this site is indexed and bad actors search every nook of the internet to steal identities

2) The application you used to write this document, in fact all applications to write documents, encode the name of the person who licensed the application, as well as other information about the licensee. Learn how to strip that meta-data out of anything you publish or send over the Internet.

3) what is the purpose of this letter?

4) who are you sending it too?

5) Just about everything that affects your VA claim has an official form that has to be used. One exception is the CUE. This is not a CUE, at least in format and form it isn't. Based on other posts I don't think you mean it to be one. So what is this letter for?

6) There is a list of No-No's in this letter, starting with admitting your were wrong on things. That will be used against you. Don't use abbreviations like Gen Med, particularly when they don't have an actual context. There is no Gen Med C&P as far as I know and there was that would not be the right way to identify it.

7) use bullets

8 ) why did you say "DBQ 2018 respectfully"?  did you mean respectively?

9) the whole section about the credentials of the NP is out of joint. What is your goal here? if it is to challenge their credentials, what are their credentials? whomever reads this, for whatever reason, will need to have that information in front of them. you cannot count on them going to look for that information. VA presumes that anyone they appoint to do a C&P is qualified. It is up to you to properly challenge that and this paragraph does not do that properly.

10) in relation to the paragraph starting "In regards to the C&P exam dated August 28, 2018..." you go on about him speaking German. How do you know he cannot speak and read English? Is this an actual C&P? How does this relate to your first post about the Doctor Opinions not being of the same value? Do you speak German? write German? If not how did you speak to him at all? did you have an interpreter???

11) In the 2nd to last paragraph you write

Rehabilitation, Diabetes, Emergency Medicine, Health promotion and prevention, smoking cessation, Diabetologe (DDG) of the doctor performing the examination did meet qualification associated with musculoskeletal evaluations/diagnosis/medical rationale/symptomology or illnesses /diseases thereof.  The examination as a whole was a fruitless activity to say the least.   

"did meet" ? why list all that just to say he met the qualifications to do the exam? or did you mean DOES NOT HAVE?

"Thereof"  is a useless word in that sentence. Please don't try to use formal/legal sounding words in an informal document. you are not a lawyer and in common language "thereof" has no value or usage.

"...fruitless activity..." this whole sentence has no value to whatever your point is supposed to be. if you insist on including it then grammatically lose "as a whole" and "to say the least".

12) that whole last paragraph needs to be cut to 2 sentences.

we don't have the information you have, so when you post questions and statements here we have no context other than what you write. If we find it confusing you can bet that anyone at the VA will too; The VA has a regulation in the MR21 that effectively says if there is no chance for an award then discard the whole thing and deny the claim.

it is not clear whom you are writing this too, why you are writing it, and what your expected outcomes are.