- 6 - Cochran determined that petitioners’ net realizable equity in each of their reported assets was the same as its reported value, except she reduced the reported value of each vehicle by 20 percent.6 Cochran summarized petitioners’ assets and liabilities as follows: Fair Quick Net market sale realizable Assets value value Encumbrance equity Cash $3,528 -- -- 3,528 Investments 3,438 -- -- 3,438 Cash value of life insurance 22,771 -- -- 22,771 Vehicles: 1989 Pontiac LE 225 180 -- 180 1997 Chevrolet Scottsdale 500 400 -- 400 1999 Buick LeSabre 3,860 3,080 7,236 -0- 2000 BMW motorcycle 3,500 2,800 –- 2,800 Home 89,000 -- -- 89,000 Other real property 17,500 -- –- 17,500 144,322 6,460 7,236 139,617 As to the reported expenses, Cochran accepted all of those expenses except for the $500 “other expense” which petitioners failed to substantiate as to either its source or amount.7 Cochran determined that petitioners’ monthly excess income (i.e., monthly income less monthly expenses) was $501 ($4,707 - ($4,706 - $500)), that petitioners’ income potential for the next 6 Cochran noted that the reported values of petitioners’ home and other real property were ascertained from their assessed values and not from appraisals or current market prices, which could be higher. Cochran also was told by petitioners that they had ascertained the value of each vehicle by using its trade-in value and considering its condition to be “fair”. 7 Cochran allowed petitioners’ medical expenses in full, although she considered the amount to be greater than average. Cochran noted that petitioners’ 2003 Federal income tax return claimed a deduction for $8,641 of medical expenses that they paid during that year.Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 Next
Last modified: May 25, 2011