Citation Nr: 20009645 Decision Date: 02/06/20 Archive Date: 02/05/20 DOCKET NO. 18-35 307 DATE: February 6, 2020 REMANDED Entitlement to an apportionment in excess of $150 per month to the appellant on behalf of D.T. (the Veteran’s child) is remanded. REASONS FOR REMAND The Veteran served on active duty in the United States Army from September 1979 to April 1980. The appellant is the mother and custodian of his child, D.T. This matter comes to the Board of Veterans’ Appeals (Board) on appeal from a January 2016 decision issued by the Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) Regional Office in New Orleans, Louisiana. Entitlement to an increased apportionment is remanded. The issue as developed by the agency of original jurisdiction (AOJ) is not ripe for appellate review as all steps necessary to ensure the procedural and due process rights of the parties have not been completed. This case involves a simultaneously contested claim, to which the provisions of 38 U.S.C. § 7105A are applicable. Cases involving simultaneously contested claims are also subject to special procedural regulations. See 38 C.F.R. §§ 19.100, 19.101, 19.102, 20.500, 20.501, 20.502, 20.503, 20.504. Specifically, 38 C.F.R. § 19.100 provides that, in a simultaneously contested claim, all interested parties are to be notified of the action taken by the AOJ and of the right and time limit for initiating an appeal, as well as notification of the right to a hearing and representation. Upon the filing of a notice of disagreement, all interested parties will be furnished a copy of the statement of the case (SOC). 38 C.F.R. § 19.101. When a substantive appeal is filed, the content will be furnished to the other contesting parties to the extent that it contains information which could directly affect the payment or potential payment of the benefit which is the subject of the contested claim. 38 C.F.R. § 19.102. In this case, there has not been full compliance with these procedures. Specifically, the record does not reflect that the Veteran was provided a copy of an April 2018 SOC or the content of the appellant’s June 2018 substantive appeal. Accordingly, a remand is necessary in order to ensure full compliance with contested claims procedures. In light of assertions made by the parties, the Board also finds it prudent to obtain updated Financial Status Reports. This matter is REMANDED for the following action: 1. Ensure full compliance with the contested claims procedures outlined in 38 C.F.R. §§ 19.100-02 and 20.500-04. Specifically, ensure that the Veteran and his representative are provided a copy of the April 2018 SOC, as well as the content of the appellant’s June 2018 substantive appeal. 2. Send the appellant a Financial Status Report form and request that she complete it. The significance of the appellant’s compliance with this request must be explained, to specifically include advising her that failure to cooperate may result in an adverse determination. 3. Send the Veteran a Financial Status Report form and request that he complete it. The significance of the Veteran’s compliance with this request must be explained, to specifically include advising him that failure to cooperate may result in an adverse determination. 4. After completing the above, and any other development as may be indicated by any response received as a consequence of the actions taken in the preceding paragraphs, the issue on appeal should be readjudicated based on the entirety of the evidence. If any benefit sought remains denied, both the Veteran and the appellant should be issued a supplemental SOC. An appropriate period of time should be allowed for response. DAVID A. BRENNINGMEYER Veterans Law Judge Board of Veterans’ Appeals Attorney for the Board J. Ragheb, Counsel The Board’s decision in this case is binding only with respect to the instant matter decided. This decision is not precedential and does not establish VA policies or interpretations of general applicability. 38 C.F.R. § 20.1303.