CUE UPDATE

[RBrogen 62]

Happy Holidays Everyone,

I wanted to let those of you who are interested know that the cue I filed for change of effective date from March 2018 to October 1999 is now in the "Preparation for Decision" status.  I mailed the formal CUE September 17, 2019 and it went to "Preparation for Decision" status today.  Now I'll be on pins and needles until I get the decision packet in the mail.  I'll keep you all posted!

Best,

[Dustoff 11 272]

Thanks for the info.  Just to let you know in case you are unaware and that is Ebenefits is not always accurate or reliable info and by this I mean 1. I received in the mail my hardcopy decision long before Ebenefits showed my decision as completed on their website. 2.  Very often your claim will bounce back and forth from one category to another such as from Preparation for decision back to evidence gathering and then back again to PFD and on and on it goes.  Like you and many others I have been thru this merry go round on more than one occasion.

All we can do is wait for the actual hard copy of decision in the mail.  You could call IRIS (peggy) at the 1 800 327 1000 (????) help line and maybe they can clarify your claim status (present) for you.  I have had good luck with them but the phone wait was a long time before talking to peggy or henry.  

Just think of the VA as your friendly IRS auditor.

Above info is not legal advice as I am not an attorney, paralegal, Or VSO but a 30 plus year vet filing my own claims and appeals.

[RBrogen 62]

1 minute ago, Dustoff 11 said:

Thanks for the info.  Just to let you know in case you are unaware and that is Ebenefits is not always accurate or reliable info and by this I mean 1. I received in the mail my hardcopy decision long before Ebenefits showed my decision as completed on their website. 2.  Very often your claim will bounce back and forth from one category to another such as from Preparation for decision back to evidence gathering and then back again to PFD and on and on it goes.  Like you and many others I have been thru this merry go round on more than one occasion.

All we can do is wait for the actual hard copy of decision in the mail.  You could call IRIS (peggy) at the 1 800 327 1000 (????) help line and maybe they can clarify your claim status (present) for you.  I have had good luck with them but the phone wait was a long time before talking to peggy or henry.  

Just think of the VA as your friendly IRS auditor.

Above info is not legal advice as I am not an attorney, paralegal, Or VSO but a 30 plus year vet filing my own claims and appeals.

Thanks for the feedback Dustoff11.  I'm pretty familiar with the EBenefits system and process and of the 5 or 6 claims I have done in the past year, I've been able to track  the status pretty accurately (both on ebenefits and va.gov).  This is also in conjunction with calling the VA and discussing status there.  Yes, ultimately all we can do is wait for the actual decision packet to arrive.  My fingers/toes and everything else are crossed ... hoping for the best!  

Happy Holidays!

[Dustoff 11 272]

In the year 2005 I won a CUE appeal I filed myself with the U.S. CAVC court and on my No. 2 contention the court agreed that the 1985 to 87 VARO decisions contained CUE by not adjudicating my PTSD claims as also inferred TDIU claims and the court remanded this No. 2 contention back to BVA for adjudication of this claim.

It was a long hard grind as I filed the CUE claim in 2000 and it was denied by BVA on appeal in 2003.  In spite of what some SOBs on another forum tells vets CUE errors and CUE claims are indeed common and many times vets win these claims thru remands or grants from BVA  and the courts.

These other pukes will tell us that these CUE errors were not CUE but other type of errors, Blah, Blah, Blah.  These former lifer VA raters and VA DROs never admit that the VA raters make serious mistakes but 1000s of public BVA and courts decisions tells us this is not true. For over 30 years VA raters make the same minor and major mistakes over and over again.  This is not accidental.  Good luck to you.

[RBrogen 62]

7 minutes ago, Dustoff 11 said:

In the year 2005 I won a CUE appeal I filed myself with the U.S. CAVC court and on my No. 2 contention the court agreed that the 1985 to 87 VARO decisions contained CUE by not adjudicating my PTSD claims as also inferred TDIU claims and the court remanded this No. 2 contention back to BVA for adjudication of this claim.

It was a long hard grind as I filed the CUE claim in 2000 and it was denied by BVA on appeal in 2003.  In spite of what some SOBs on another forum tells vets CUE errors and CUE claims are indeed common and many times vets win these claims thru remands or grants from BVA  and the courts.

These other pukes will tell us that these CUE errors were not CUE but other type of errors, Blah, Blah, Blah.  These former lifer VA raters and VA DROs never admit that the VA raters make serious mistakes but 1000s of public BVA and courts decisions tells us this is not true. For over 30 years VA raters make the same minor and major mistakes over and over again.  This is not accidental.  Good luck to you.

I hear you brother ... and congrats on winning your CUE!  I hope to have convinced them.  I believe my case is strong but can't ever tell with the VA!

[Vync 2,295]

@Dustoff 11 It looks like @RBrogen's claims are being processed by employees who do a better job at keeping the status current. I have a couple of CUE's in the hopper now and va.gov is running about two days behind the actual status. However, I did have to submit an IRIS to nudge them when mine sat for a week with no update. Compared to when I had a bunch of claims in the system years ago, I do believe they are handling them better than they used to.

[RBrogen 62]

54 minutes ago, Vync said:

@Dustoff 11 It looks like @RBrogen's claims are being processed by employees who do a better job at keeping the status current. I have a couple of CUE's in the hopper now and va.gov is running about two days behind the actual status. However, I did have to submit an IRIS to nudge them when mine sat for a week with no update. Compared to when I had a bunch of claims in the system years ago, I do believe they are handling them better than they used to.

@Vync I have been fortunate as having disengaged from the VA for over 20 years because of a bad experience, I remained at 20% since 1991.  I decided to reconnect and filed my first claim in Nov 2018 and after 4 claims wound up at the 100% total and permanent as of April 2019.  It is definitely worth fighting the fight.

[Vync 2,295]

17 minutes ago, RBrogen said:

@Vync I have been fortunate as having disengaged from the VA for over 20 years because of a bad experience, I remained at 20% since 1991.  I decided to reconnect and filed my first claim in Nov 2018 and after 4 claims wound up at the 100% total and permanent as of April 2019.  It is definitely worth fighting the fight.

I completely agree! My initial claims were awful. I was at 40% from 1995 to about 2008 when I found hadit. I made it to 100% by 2013. I educated myself, looked back at the initial ratings, and realized the VA granted lowball initial ratings by not following the laws in effect at the time. I decided it was a moral imperative to right these wrongs.

[GBArmy 1,447]

Vync I agree with you 100%. I believe many here agree and have experienced the same. The VA denies or at the very least low balls us and just ignores the evidence. It makes you do two things; either roll over, or, get you so mad you try even harder to right the wrong by go after everything you have coming to you. And we educate ourselves and just go out and try again. And again if need be.

[RBrogen 62]

13 minutes ago, GBArmy said:

Vync I agree with you 100%. I believe many here agree and have experienced the same. The VA denies or at the very least low balls us and just ignores the evidence. It makes you do two things; either roll over, or, get you so mad you try even harder to right the wrong by go after everything you have coming to you. And we educate ourselves and just go out and try again. And again if need be.

Yes it is IMPERATIVE that every vet educate themselves fully to the process and the way the VA will most likely view their conditions, ratings and process.  Unfortunately there are some vets out there who feel the VA should just give them the rating they want without doing anything but sending in a note.  I've heard vets complain about "those who know what to say who get the best ratings".  They don't seem to get the fact that the VA is a system with a history of doing the minimal and less to help vets.  Every vet  must educate themselves to that system if they are to get properly rated.  I know I've been on a VA indoctrination course the past year and had I not educated myself I would still be sitting at 20% without any benefits for my family nor a solid retirement.  An example is I just responded to a post where a vet was confused about their rating level when all they had to do was follow the rules for bilateral conditions and then follow the rating chart to see why they were rated at what they were.  The basics of understanding how things are rated, what conditions rate higher, secondary conditions like scars which can be rated for pain as well as disfigurement could have major impact on an individuals overall rating level.

Edited December 30, 2019 by RBrogen

[Vync 2,295]

@GBArmy The crazy part is I used a state VSO to file the claims. The initial application consisted of a single sentence. I asked about telling the VA what happened during service, but they said the VA has people who get paid to go through everything. When the denial letters came in, they helped me file the appeals. When the award letter arrived, they looked at the first two pages and told me not to rock the boat. I trusted them.

In retrospect, they are very helpful for quick things. However, they are just not setup for thorough assistance for every veteran. It is like an economy of minimums. Do just enough to clear the lobby. However, I assume they might be more thorough for helpless veterans.

The moral of the story is to trust, but verify. Know your evidence. Understand the importance of a nexus. Carefully read the C&P exam results and decision letters. Understand the rating criteria and applicable laws. Double-check and cross reference everything to ensure the result was actually correct.

[Vync 2,295]

@RBrogen Indeed! A lot of it ties back to being in the military and trusting administrative teams know their trade. We leave the service believing that the VSO's have us covered. Later on, I did have an excellent VSO, but she retired. Her replacement was decent, but missed some things. Eventually, I got to the point that I would do my own research and then take my final draft by the VSO for review. 

After my heart attack earlier this year, I filed two new claims through my local VSO. My head wasn't clear at all. In both cases, they were denied. I should have just did an intent to file and waited until I was a bit more clear-headed. I'm pretty certain I can win both by filing supplemental review requests, but want to ensure everything is airtight.

 

13 minutes ago, RBrogen said:

I've heard vets complain about "those who know what to say who get the best ratings".

This part got me laughing. I feel it is more about knowing how to approach and follow up.

[GBArmy 1,447]

Vync we must have ate the same oatmeal this morning; again I couldn't agree more. One thing still gets me though. The VSO's still say "don't rock the boat." 9 times out of 10 (probably more)  that is just flat out wrong. To me, when they say that it either means one of two things: they are lazy and don't want the extra work. Or two, lack of understanding or training. They just don't know about SMC's, etc. I tell everyone that if you want to use  VSO, and they are useful, make sure you really check them out before selecting one.

[RBrogen 62]

1 minute ago, Vync said:

@RBrogen Indeed! A lot of it ties back to being in the military and trusting administrative teams know their trade. We leave the service believing that the VSO's have us covered. Later on, I did have an excellent VSO, but she retired. Her replacement was decent, but missed some things. Eventually, I got to the point that I would do my own research and then take my final draft by the VSO for review. 

After my heart attack earlier this year, I filed two new claims through my local VSO. My head wasn't clear at all. In both cases, they were denied. I should have just did an intent to file and waited until I was a bit more clear-headed. I'm pretty certain I can win both by filing supplemental review requests, but want to ensure everything is airtight.

 

This part got me laughing. I feel it is more about knowing how to approach and follow up.

You are you own best advocate.  While VSOs can help, you need to spearhead your own destiny.  A VSO has numerous things going on and honestly, you, nor the next vet is their highest priority ... they try to deal with their workload as much as possible but inevitably you are the best representative for you.

[shrekthetank1 722]

1 minute ago, Vync said:

@RBrogen Indeed! A lot of it ties back to being in the military and trusting administrative teams know their trade. We leave the service believing that the VSO's have us covered. Later on, I did have an excellent VSO, but she retired. Her replacement was decent, but missed some things. Eventually, I got to the point that I would do my own research and then take my final draft by the VSO for review. 

After my heart attack earlier this year, I filed two new claims through my local VSO. My head wasn't clear at all. In both cases, they were denied. I should have just did an intent to file and waited until I was a bit more clear-headed. I'm pretty certain I can win both by filing supplemental review requests, but want to ensure everything is airtight.

 

This part got me laughing. I feel it is more about knowing how to approach and follow up.

I have to somewhat agree with what he said as if you don't tell them every little detail then it will hurt you in the end.  

I was scared to tell them I was hearing voices, and I did not want to talk about the flashbacks I was having because it did not want to relive them.  

For whatever reason saying the right details might be a better way of saying it.  

[shrekthetank1 722]

1 minute ago, GBArmy said:

Vync we must have ate the same oatmeal this morning; again I couldn't agree more. One thing still gets me though. The VSO's still say "don't rock the boat." 9 times out of 10 (probably more)  that is just flat out wrong. To me, when they say that it either means one of two things: they are lazy and don't want the extra work. Or two, lack of understanding or training. They just don't know about SMC's, etc. I tell everyone that if you want to use  VSO, and they are useful, make sure you really check them out before selecting one.

I love it when they say don't rock the boat!  I tell them how will I get anything done if I don't rock the boat?  I am not happy with what I was given or covered for, because this is not what actually happened or was said too them.

I say rip that mast right off the boat!

[RBrogen 62]

2 minutes ago, GBArmy said:

Vync we must have ate the same oatmeal this morning; again I couldn't agree more. One thing still gets me though. The VSO's still say "don't rock the boat." 9 times out of 10 (probably more)  that is just flat out wrong. To me, when they say that it either means one of two things: they are lazy and don't want the extra work. Or two, lack of understanding or training. They just don't know about SMC's, etc. I tell everyone that if you want to use  VSO, and they are useful, make sure you really check them out before selecting one.

Correct and understand also that VSOs are "trained" as well to follow a prescribed system and that system is the bulk VA conveyer belt.  If you know how to compile the evidence, apply and followup you can manage your own claim without a VSO BUT you MUST research and educate yourself to your claim's specific nuances so that you can present it to the VA properly and in a structure/formate they understand.  If you make it easy for them, they can process your claim quickly.

[RBrogen 62]

2 minutes ago, shrekthetank1 said:

I love it when they say don't rock the boat!  I tell them how will I get anything done if I don't rock the boat?  I am not happy with what I was given or covered for, because this is not what actually happened or was said too them.

I say rip that mast right off the boat!

lol I'm with you brother .... strap a frick'n Evinrude motor on the back of that puppy, full throttle and beach that bitch!

[RBrogen 62]

I also have at least one more claim to get fixed where I am currently rated for Right Upper Radiculopathy 20% and Left Upper Radiculopathy 20% for mild paralysis.  During one of my last claims I had 2 C&Ps, both of which included an exam for peripheral nerve issues where they diagnosed moderate paralysis of Lower Radicular Group (left and right) as "Moderate".  I figured I would get my cue claim done first and then have them fix this since it will not have any impact on my rating since it is at 100% P&T.  This is more to make sure they have properly rated all of my conditions.

[Vync 2,295]

37 minutes ago, shrekthetank1 said:

I have to somewhat agree with what he said as if you don't tell them every little detail then it will hurt you in the end.  

Yeah, that can definitely help, but just make sure they don't go into too much detail when typing up the claims. If you make the scope too narrow the C&P docs will also narrow their focus. I learned this earlier this year when my VSO asked why I thought my heart attack should be SC. I vaguely recall telling him I thought it was due to NSAIDs. That's exactly what he wrote and what the C&P doc checked. Even though I told the doc it might have been due to other meds, they focused only on that class of meds and denied my claim. Now, I advise being somewhat vague, like "heart attack due to meds used to treat SC disabilities, plus any secondary conditions". Cover your bases.

[Vync 2,295]

19 minutes ago, RBrogen said:

I also have at least one more claim to get fixed where I am currently rated for Right Upper Radiculopathy 20% and Left Upper Radiculopathy 20% for mild paralysis.  During one of my last claims I had 2 C&Ps, both of which included an exam for peripheral nerve issues where they diagnosed moderate paralysis of Lower Radicular Group (left and right) as "Moderate".  I figured I would get my cue claim done first and then have them fix this since it will not have any impact on my rating since it is at 100% P&T.  This is more to make sure they have properly rated all of my conditions.

It's tricky because you need to know where they define mild/moderate/severe. When I got mine, it was in M21-1, not in the rating criteria. The problem with M21-1 is it changes frequently. Not certain you can just look up old versions like you can check changes in 38 CFR in the Federal Register.