Citation Nr: A21019253
Decision Date: 12/03/21	Archive Date: 12/03/21

DOCKET NO. 200221-63614
DATE: December 3, 2021

REMANDED

Entitlement to clothing allowance is remanded.

REASONS FOR REMAND

This matter is on appeal as a result of the VA-Form 10182 (notice of disagreement) the Veteran submitted in February 2020.  A review of VA-Form 10182 shows that he is appealing a denial that he indicates is dated January 21, 2020.  The Veteran submitted a letter dated January 21, 2020.  A read of this letter shows that VA acknowledged receipt of a notice of disagreement to a previous decision for the clothing allowance claim, that VA reconsidered the matters, and that VA indicated there was an enclosed statement of the case (SOC).  VA also advised the Veteran to file both a VA Form 9 and VA-Form 10182 to appeal the matters to the Board of Veterans' Appeals.

Upon review of the file there is no claim, no original denial of the clothing allowance claim (as referenced in the January 21, 2020 VA letter), no notice of disagreement to the original denial (as referenced in the January 21, 2020 VA letter), and no SOC (as referenced in the January 21, 2020 VA letter). 

Therefore, the Board finds that pre-decisional duty to assist errors were committed and a remand is required as the Agency of Jurisdiction (AOJ) failed to consider substantive evidence of record, that was not made part of the file and should have been prior to the issuance of the January 2020 denial.

The matter is REMANDED for the following action:

Associate the following:  

(a.) A copy of the original claim pertinent to the appeal.  

(b.) A copy of the original clothing allowance denial as referenced in the January 21, 2020 VA letter.

(c.) A copy of the notice of disagreement to the original clothing allowance denial as referenced in the January 21, 2020 VA letter.

(d.) A copy of the statement of the case that was enclosed, as referenced in the January 21, 2020 VA letter.

If such records are unable to be associated with the electronic record, make a formal finding of unavailability, and perform any appropriate development.

 

 

H.M. WALKER

Veterans Law Judge

Board of Veterans' Appeals

Attorney for the Board	T. Talamantes, 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 This decision is not precedential and does not establish VA policies or interpretations of general applicability. 38 C.F.R. § 20.1303.