Assessment Review Board
Commission de révision de l’évaluation foncière
ISSUE DATE:
October 19, 2018
FILE NO.:
WR 155898
Assessed Person(s):
Katy Ma, Stephen Ma and Joseph Ma
Appellant(s):
Katy Ma
Respondent(s):
Municipal Property Assessment Corporation (“MPAC”) Region 09
Respondent(s):
City of Toronto
Property Location(s):
118 Northdale Road
Municipality(ies):
City of Toronto
Roll Number(s):
1908-082-015-00900-0000
Appeal Number(s):
3263079 and 3300256
Taxation Year(s):
2017 and 2018
Hearing Event No.:
702693
Legislative Authority:
Section 40 of the Assessment Act, R.S.O. 1990, c. A.31, as amended
Heard:
September 19, 2018 by telephone conference call
APPEARANCES:
Parties
Representative
Katy Ma
Andrew Attard and Darcy Walker
MPAC
Carlo Bassi
City of Toronto
No one appeared
DECISION OF THE BOARD DELIVERED BY JEAN-PAUL PILON
INTRODUCTION
1Katy Ma (the “Appellant”) is the owner of 118 Northdale Road (the “Subject Property”) which is a single family detached property located in the City of Toronto.
2Pursuant to the provisions of the Assessment Act, R.S.O. 1990, c. A. 31 (the “Act”), the assessment of land shall be based on its current value. The Act also provides that, for the 2017 to 2020 taxation years, the Municipal Property Assessment Corporation (“MPAC”) is required to assess this value as of the valuation date, January 1, 2016 (“current value”).
3MPAC has determined that the current value of the Subject Property at $5,705,082 but has returned an assessment of $4,808,000 and has not given notice that it is seeking an increase.
4The Appellant filed an appeal for the 2017 taxation year with the Assessment Review Board (the “Board”), and has been deemed to have brought the same appeal with respect to the Subject Property for the 2018 taxation year pursuant to section 40 of the Act. It was the Appellant’s position that MPAC’s assessment of current value is too high and that the correct current value is $4,678,000. MPAC took the position at the hearing that its assessed value is correct.
5Pursuant to subsection 40(11) of the Act, the City of Toronto a party to the proceeding. However, the City did not advise the Board of its position on the issues raised in these appeals, and no one appeared at the hearing on the City’s behalf.
6Subsection 44(3)(b) of the [Act](https://www.can