Citation Nr: 21003314 Decision Date: 01/21/21 Archive Date: 01/21/21 DOCKET NO. 15-32 729 DATE: January 21, 2021 REMANDED Entitlement to an increased apportionment to the appellant on behalf of C.S. and C.S., the Veteran's children, is remanded. REASONS FOR REMAND The Veteran served on active duty from October 1980 to May 1983. The appellee is the mother and custodian of the Veteran’s minor children, C.S. and C.S. This matter comes to the Board of Veterans’ Appeals (Board) on appeal from an August 2012 decision issued by the Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) Regional Office (RO). 1. Entitlement to an increased apportionment to the appellant on behalf of C.S. and C.S., the Veteran's children, is remanded. This case involves a simultaneously contested claim; therefore, 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, VA has not fully complied with these procedures. Specifically, the record does not reflect that the Veteran was provided the content of the appellant’s September 2015 substantive appeal. Further, the appellant requested a Board hearing in her September 2015 substantive appeal. The appellant was never notified the hearing had been scheduled as the correspondence was sent to the Veteran’s address. Accordingly, a remand is necessary to provide the Veteran a copy of the September 2015 substantive appeal and to then reschedule a hearing in compliance with the contested claims procedures. Additionally, the appellant has indicated that her financial status has changed throughout the appeal period. The outcome of apportionment cases depends on the financial status of the parties. The appellant last submitted documents detailing her financial status in August 2012. Given the lapse in time, the Board finds that the completion of multiple VA Forms 21-0788 (Information Regarding Apportionment of Beneficiary’s Award) for the appellant (from June 2011 until June 2016) would be helpful in resolving the issue on appeal. The matters are REMANDED for the following action: 1. Ensure full compliance with the contested claims procedures outlined in 38 C.F.R. §§ 19.100-02, 20.500-04. Specifically, ensure that the Veteran is provided with the content of the Appellant’s September 2015 substantive appeal. 2. Furnish VA Forms 21-0788 (Information Regarding Apportionment of Beneficiary’s Award) to the Appellant and The Veteran and request that they complete the forms for the periods from June 2011 to the June 2016, indicating their income and expenses. Advise that failure to provide the requested financial statements could result in an adverse decision in this matter. 3. After the development directed above has been completed to the extent possible, readjudicate the claim on appeal and return the matter to the Board for the scheduling of a hearing. MARJORIE A. AUER Veterans Law Judge Board of Veterans’ Appeals Attorney for the Board Kelly A. Gastoukian 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.