Citation Nr: 21029256 Decision Date: 05/13/21 Archive Date: 05/13/21 DOCKET NO. 19-12 533 DATE: May 13, 2021 REMANDED Entitlement to an apportionment of the Veteran's VA compensation benefits on behalf of C.J.R., his son, is remanded. REASONS FOR REMAND The Veteran served on active duty in the Army from May 1987 to August 1992 and from May 1999 to June 2013, including service in Iraq from February 2007 to February 2008. The Appellant seeks benefits as the custodian (mother) and guardian of the Veteran's helpless child, C.J.R. This matter is before the Board of Veterans' Appeals (Board) on appeal of an October 2016 special apportionment decision of the Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) Regional Office (RO), which denied an apportionment of the Veteran's VA compensation benefits to his helpless child, C.J.R. In September 2020, the Veteran and the Appellant appeared at a virtual hearing before the undersigned Veterans Law Judge. The Board remanded the matter in October 2020 for further development. The matter has been returned to the Board for further adjudication. 1. Entitlement to an apportionment of the Veteran's VA compensation benefits on behalf of C.J.R., his son, is remanded. After a review of the evidence in this case, the Board has determined that this matter 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. The Board notes that this case involves a simultaneously contested claim, which requires compliance with special procedural regulations to ensure both parties' due process rights are protected. 38 U.S.C. § 7105A; 38 C.F.R. §§ 19.100-02, 20.500-04 (outlining procedural requirements). Notably, the agency of original jurisdiction (AOJ) must notify all parties of all actions taken by the AOJ, of the right and time limit for initiation of an appeal, and of the right to a hearing and representative. 38 C.F.R. § 19.100. Additionally, VA must mail evidence to each contesting claimant. VA claimants are entitled to the procedural requirements that ensure a claimant's right to full and fair assistance and adjudication of their claim. See, e.g., Bernard v. Brown, 4 Vet. App. 384, 392-394 (1993). This includes ensuring that claimants are afforded the opportunity to respond to the arguments of other parties in a simultaneously contested claim. Sapp v. Wilkie, 32 Vet. App. 125 (2019). The Board notes that the December 2020 Supplemental Statement of the Case (SSOC) was sent to the Appellant's former address. At the September 2020 Board hearing the Appellant had indicated that she wanted to use a P.O. Box to receive VA correspondence. The SSOC was not sent to the P.O. Box address. Further, in February 2021, the Board mailed a letter to the Veteran notifying him the Board had docketed the appeal of the apportionment; however, this was not sent to the Appellant. There is no indication in the claims file that the Appellant or Veteran were notified of the Board's docketing of the appeal as required 38 C.F.R. § 19.100 and 38 C.F.R. § 19.102. As a result, there has not been compliance with the applicable procedural regulations and a remand is necessary to ensure that the claims are developed and adjudicated in conformance with applicable procedural safeguards. As to the merits, both the Appellant and the Veteran report having financial hardship and their respective income and expenses remains unclear. Further, the Appellant reports her ability to work is impacted because of her childcare obligations in taking care of their son, C.J.R., who has been adjudicated by VA as a child over 18 years of age who was shown to be permanently incapable of self-support by reason of mental or physical defect by the age of 18 years. See April 2016 RO rating decision. The Board's October 2019 remand requested the parties to provide updated financial information. To date, only the Veteran has provided updated financial information. On remand, as both the Veteran and the Appellant's income and expense information may have changed since they last submitted VA Form 21-0788, the parties must be advised to provide updated income and expense information, to include any child support payment made or received. The matters are REMANDED for the following action: 1. The AOJ should take appropriate measures to determine the most recent home address of record for the Appellant (or otherwise the appropriate contact address) as the party who is seeking an apportionment in this case. The address confirmation should take into account that based on the September 2020 Board hearing testimony the Appellant had not received correspondence from the VA and had requested a P.O. Box address be used. 2. Ensure full compliance with the contested claims procedures outlined in 38 C.F.R. §§ 19.100-02, 20.500-04. Specifically, ensure that the Appellant is provided with a copy of the December 2020 Supplemental Statement of the Case at her confirmed current address. 3. Request an updated VA Form 21-0788 or other comparable financial statement from both parties, advising each party that failure to provide the requested financial statement could result in an adverse decision for him or her in this matter. 4. Request that both parties provide updated child support records, to include all related court documents, payment history documentation, the amount of any current arrearage, and proof of any garnished wages or payments made by the Veteran to the Appellant. STEVEN D. REISS 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.