- 12 -
greater than those they had claimed in their June 20, 2001,
letter. Given those circumstances, the determination to sustain
the levy was not an abuse of discretion.
The crux of petitioners’ contentions in this case is that
certain expenses should have been allowed by the settlement
officer in greater amounts. Petitioners dispute two items which
the settlement officer refused to allow additional expenses for.
First, petitioners contend that the expenses for housing and
utilities should have been based on the local standards
applicable to Ozaukee County, Wisconsin, and not Milwaukee
County, Wisconsin, since “Our house is less than one half mile
from Ozaukee county and is more consistent with the costs of that
county than with those of Milwaukee county.”7 Petitioners
propose an average of the allowable expense standards for the two
counties; i.e., $1,394, be used to determine a proper monthly
installment payment. Second, petitioners claim that the
settlement officer “arbitrarily” allowed $400 of medical
expenses, whereas she should have allowed $695, the amount
petitioners listed on the June 20, 2001, Form 433-A that they
7The local standards for housing and utilities for calendar
year 2002 list the allowable expenses for a family of four in
Milwaukee County, Wisconsin, at $1,255, and in Ozaukee County,
Wisconsin, at $1,533.
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 Next
Last modified: May 25, 2011