Assessment Review Board / Commission de révision de l’évaluation foncière
ISSUE DATE: February 14, 2019
Moving Party(ies): Dennis Horn, Kimberly Horn
Respondent(s): Municipal Property Assessment Corporation (“MPAC”) Region 27
Respondent(s): Town of Amherstburg
Property Location(s): 9404 Malden Road
Municipality(ies): Town of Amherstburg
Roll Number(s): 3729-500-000-28902-0000
Taxation Year(s): 2014, 2015 and 2016
Hearing Event No.: 709477
Legislative Authority: Rule 26(b) of the Assessment Review Board Rules of Practice and Procedure
Heard: January 24, 2019 by written submission
APPEARANCES:
Parties Dennis Horn, Kimberly Horn
Counsel/Representative Self-represented
Parties MPAC
Counsel/Representative Calvin Ho
Parties Town of Amherstburg
Counsel/Representative No one appeared
DISPOSITION OF THE BOARD DELIVERED BY SCOTT McANSH
1Denis Horn and Kimberly Horn are the owners of the property at 9404 Malden Road in the Town of Amherstburg. They seek permission from this Assessment Review Board (this “Board”) to file an appeal of the 2014, 2015, and 2016 taxation year assessments of the property after the filing deadline set in the Assessment Act, R.S.O. 1990, c. A.31 (the “Act”).
2The Horns home was still under construction in 2013. They filed a request for reconsideration of the 2013 assessment of the property, which they settled with MPAC. MPAC settled the matter on the basis of an “unfinished allowance” for the partially finished nature of the property. That allowance was removed from the 2014, 2015, and 2016 assessments. The Horns say that the 2013 agreement should apply to all of those taxation years and are therefore seeking permission file late appeals of those taxation years pursuant to Rule 26(b) of the Board’s Rules of Practice and Procedure (the “Rules”).
3Rule 26(b) requires that three things be proven, by affidavit, before a late appeal can be granted: (1) that the person was entitled to receive a notice of assessment; (2) that the person did not receive the notice of assessment; and (3) that the person filed an application within 30 days of becoming aware of the issues in dispute. The Horns have not provided evidence that they did not receive the notice of assessment for the 2014, 2015, and 2016 taxation years. Nor have they proven that they filed this application in a timely way. Their application for a late appeal is, therefore, denied.
Law
4It is not common that a tribunal, such as the Board, has the power to alter a filing deadline set in legislation. The Ontario Superior Court found that this Board could extend the time to file an assessment appeal in Fleming and Smith Ltd. and Regional Assessment Commissioner Region No. 31 et al., 1979 CanLII 1870 (ON SC). The Board codified the conditions set by the Court in Rule 26(b), which states:
26 The Board may accept an appeal received after the time set in the Assessment Act only if the appellant satisfies the Board, by way of affidavit evidence, that:…
(b) the appellant is a person entitled to receive a notice of assessment who did not receive notice, and filed the appeal with the Board within 30 days of becoming aware of the assessment or classification that is the subject of the appeal.
5As noted above, the Rule requires that three things be proven: (1) an entitlement to notice; (2) a lack of receipt of notice, and (3) a timely application.
Entitled to Notice
6The Horns are the owners of the property. Owners are entitled to an annual notice of assessment. They therefore meet the first requirement of Rule 26(b).
Did not Receive Notice
7The Horns’ evidence does not claim that they did not receive the assessment notice. They primarily argue that MPAC did not apply the “Request for Reconsideration Minutes of Settlement 2013 Tax Year” to the 2014, 2015, and 2016 taxation year. They, in fact, brought a claim against MPAC in Small Claim Court partly on the basis that the 2013 settlement should apply to other taxation years. That claim was dismissed, with costs, on February 8, 2018. They say that they are seeking late appeals because they understand that their claim in Small Claims Court was dismissed because they did not appeal to the Board.
8This Board can only grant late appeals if the person applying proves that they did not receive the notice of assessment that they were legally entitled to receive. The Horns have not provided that evidence. They are