Just about ready to submit HLR

[JKWilliamsSr]

I have some questions before I submit my HLR.

The document pointing out the errors is so far 38 pages long.  Not because there are a ton of errors but that the same errors were repeated.  For example they denied an increase for my left knee and right knee under seperate decisions.  What I did was listed the left knee decision and pointed out they did not apply Deluca, Mitchell....etc.   Then I listed the right knee decision and listed the same things,.  I did it that way because I did not want to give them an excuse saying that I did not say I did not point an error out.  For example I did not want them to say I pointed Deluca for the left knee and did not do so for the right knee.   Also my IME separates each disability.  My IME warrants different percentages for the right and left knee so I thought it best to keep them separated.

There are some things I am pointing in my HLR and did not know if it would have any value.   It deals with the VA being required to state the reasons for explaining the reasons they did not consider or give my lay or medical evidence at all or gave minimal weight.  For example I found 9 precedent setting CAVC cases that state the the VA is required to supply a reason for why they rejected lay and/or medical evidence.  I included this in my HLR.  My thinking it is important to included it because if they decided to deny my HLR it shows them I know the requirements in case they try to not included it in my statement of case.

Here is an example of how I know with absolute certainty the did not consider my lay evidence.   In my denial for diabetes the rater stated that I did not claim obesity as the reason for my diabetes.  That is completely wrong because my VA Form 21-4138 that is submitted my statement clearly states that I using obesity as an intermediate step to my diabetes claim and I even submitted the VA OIG document that states it can be used.  That alone tells me they did not read my evidence.

[JKWilliamsSr]

54 minutes ago, paulstrgn said:

Your best chances are one page, think of the first page as "Cliff Notes". Let it be your talking points covering all the documents you are submitting. Don't count on them reading everything, they will usually read the first page. But submit all the documents so if necessary you can use it for an HLR/appeal.

What I will probably do is have the first page list all the disabilities and what did not happen in short form and attached would be detailed explanation on how they were not properly applied. 

For example. 

1. Left and right knee

a. Deluca not applied - Deluca v. Brown

b. Mitchell not applied - Mitchell v. Shinseki

c. 38 CFR 4.45 not properly applied. 

 

2. Left and Right Hip

a. Lay evidence not considered - Jandreau v. Nicholson,  Kahana v Shinseki, Caluza v. Brown

b. Medical evidence improperly rejected - Shipwash v. Brown 

Edited November 19, 2019 by JKWilliamsSr

[Vync]

If you are using Microsoft Word for the word processor, you can do  a SHIFT-RETURN and it will reduce the spacing between the next line. If you are using MS Word styles, you can edit them to reduce the spacing as long as you apply a style to it.

You're on the right track

[vetquest]

Sounds like a winner.

[JKWilliamsSr]

Well my HLR is complete to the best of my ability.   I know I am not an attorney and did the best I could to put forth an argument for the errors that were made.   I figured before I went ahead and faxed in the form with the errors that were made I would list my document.   

I hope this works but in any case I think the format could be helpful.  Based on the advice I received here I changed how I created it and took a document what was over 40 pages and condensed it to 17. 

I don't expect people to read it all but a quick review could be helpful.  

HLR Review.docx

[Vync]

I gave your document a look and I think you might end up educating the VA employee doing the HLR. I wish a lot of the statutes and rulings could be retroactively applied to my CUE claim. You literally did what I recommend - spoon feed the VA exactly what they need. You broke out each issue and indicated specifically how the VA screwed up. The drawback is it makes the document longer, but the benefit is the VA knows exactly what was wrong.

 

Page 2
Potential typo: Is it "reasons and basis" or "reasons and bases"? I would make it match what is on the decision letter.

It might be beneficial to add the year after each court ruling, such as Deluca v. Brown (1995). I don't know if it is required, but in some cases the same veteran (or another with similar name) may have had multiple rulings. The year could help clarify without using the full citation of the ruling.

In your draft, some doctor names are redacted with X's, but others are plainly named. It's up to you if you want doc names out there for members to review. 

[JKWilliamsSr]

1 hour ago, Vync said:

I gave your document a look and I think you might end up educating the VA employee doing the HLR. I wish a lot of the statutes and rulings could be retroactively applied to my CUE claim. You literally did what I recommend - spoon feed the VA exactly what they need. You broke out each issue and indicated specifically how the VA screwed up. The drawback is it makes the document longer, but the benefit is the VA knows exactly what was wrong.

 

Page 2
Potential typo: Is it "reasons and basis" or "reasons and bases"? I would make it match what is on the decision letter.

It might be beneficial to add the year after each court ruling, such as Deluca v. Brown (1995). I don't know if it is required, but in some cases the same veteran (or another with similar name) may have had multiple rulings. The year could help clarify without using the full citation of the ruling.

In your draft, some doctor names are redacted with X's, but others are plainly named. It's up to you if you want doc names out there for members to review. 

Thanks for catching the typo.  You are correct and it should be "Reasons and Bases"

It is so sad that as a veteran I had to go through each line of a decision and point out an error.   It is a clear indicator that that many raters are completely inept at doing their jobs.  Without any training I should not be able to find so many glaring errors but with more than 35% of rating decisions being overturned and almost 40% being remanded back to the VARO to correct errors it is expected