The City of Brampton requested a review of a Board decision that dismissed an application to correct palpable errors in the assessment roll for a property from 2005 to 2016.
The original Hearing Member found that the errors were not palpable because they were not unintentional and required detailed investigation, and declined to exercise discretion due to the delay in filing an appeal.
On review, the Board found the Hearing Member made significant errors of law.
The Board held that a palpable error under s. 40.1 of the Assessment Act does not need to be unintentional, and the exercise of discretion requires a balanced approach weighing prejudice, not a restrictive approach enforcing limitation periods.
Finding that the property was subject to double taxation and no party claimed prejudice from the correction, the Board varied the decision, corrected the palpable errors, and extended the time for bringing appeals.
