BVA9504574 
DOCKET NO.  93-11 487     )       DATE
          )
          )

On appeal from the decision of the
Department of Veterans Affairs Regional Office in Seattle,
Washington

THE ISSUE

Entitlement to waiver of recovery of loan guaranty indebtedness.

REPRESENTATION

Appellant represented by: Disabled American Veterans

ATTORNEY FOR THE BOARD

J.W. Engle, Counsel

INTRODUCTION

The appellant served on active duty from February 1983 to
December 1988.

This matter came before the Board of Veterans' Appeals from a
decision in September 1992 by the Committee on Waivers and
Compromises of the Seattle, Washington, Department of Veterans
Affairs Regional Office (VARO).

REMAND

The appellant's representative, in the VA Form 646, Statement of
Accredited Representation in Appealed Case dated in May 1993,
requested that this case be remanded for additional development.
It was asserted that the appellant attempted to have the subject
loan refinanced during the redemption period but that no efforts
were made by VARO to verify those attempts at refinancing.  It
was further argued that a recent increase in the appellant's
service-connected disability evaluations "gives great merit to
the veteran's claim she was incapable of keeping her home due to
the severity of here service-connected disabilities."  See
Representative's statement dated in August 1993.

Review of the record reveals that in July 1993, during the
pendency of this appeal, the appellant was awarded a significant
increase in her service-connected disability benefits.  A
photocopy of a July 1993 rating decision reflects that the
appellant's combined service-connected disability evaluation was
increased from 10 percent to 40 percent.  In addition,
correspondence from the appellant dated in August 1992 indicates
that she intended to file for bankruptcy.  However, there is no
indication within the record as to whether or not the bankruptcy
action was pursued.

In view of the above and the statutory duty placed upon the
Department of Veterans Affairs to assist claimants in developing
their claims pursuant to 38 U.S.C.A. § 5107(a) (West 1991) and
Akles v. Derwinski, 1 Vet.App. 118 (1991), as well as the change
in financial circumstances due to the increase in the appellant's
service-connected disability evaluation, the Board believes that
additional development is necessary prior to completion of
appellate review.

Accordingly, this case is REMANDED for the following action:

1.  VARO should request the veteran to
submit a complete, current Financial Status
Report executed on VA Form 4-5655,
disclosing total family income, including
hers and her husband's income from any
part-time or full-time self employment and
wages from any other jobs.  Furthermore,
she should disclose all assets, including
all real estate and personal properties,
cash in banks and investments; and disclose
living expenses, installment obligations
and other debts.

2.  VARO should contact the appellant,
through her representative, and request the
names and addresses of all entities the
appellant sought refinancing from during
the redemption period.  She should also be
provided an opportunity to submit
additional argument/evidence in support of
her claim regarding the circumstances
during the time frame surrounding the
default.  All records and/or argument
received in response to these requests
should be associated with the claims
folder.

3.  VARO should ascertain whether any or
all of the debts listed by the appellant in
1992 have been discharged in bankruptcy.

4.  The appellant's claims folder should be
associated with the loan guaranty file and
after completion of the above development,
the claim to waiver of the outstanding loan
guaranty indebtedness should be
readjudicated.

Thereafter, the case should be returned to the Board, if in
order.  The Board intimates no opinion as to the ultimate outcome
of this case.  The appellant need take no action unless otherwise
notified.

          KENNETH R. ANDREWS, JR.
          Member, Board of Veterans' Appeals

The Board of Veterans' Appeals Administrative Procedures
Improvement Act, Pub. L. No. 103-271, § 6, 108 Stat. 740, ___
(1994), permits a proceeding instituted before the Board to be
assigned to an individual member of the Board for a
determination.  This proceeding has been assigned to an
individual member of the Board.

Under 38 U.S.C.A. § 7252 (West 1991), only a decision of the
Board of Veterans' Appeals is appealable to the United States
Court of Veterans Appeals.  This remand is in the nature of a
preliminary order and does not constitute a decision of the Board
on the merits of your appeal.  38 C.F.R. § 20.1100(b) (1994).