Assessment Review Board

Commission de révision de l’évaluation foncière

ISSUE DATE: April 18, 2019

FILE NO.: WR 158342

Assessed Person(s): H.S., G.S. and P.S.

Appellant(s): H.S. and G.S.

Respondent(s): Town of Newmarket

Property Location(s): Withheld

Municipality(ies): Town of Newmarket

Roll Number(s): Withheld

Appeal Number(s): 3283803

Taxation Year(s): 2017

Hearing Event No.: 698572 and 709865

Legislative Authority: Section 357(7) of the Municipal Act, 2001, S.O. 2001, c. 25 as amended

Heard: June 19, 2018 and January 18, 2019 in Newmarket, Ontario

APPEARANCES:

Parties

Counsel⁺/Representative

H.S. and G.S.

P.S.

Town of Newmarket

June 15, 2018 hearing date: Grace Marsh Paul Voorn⁺ Selene Ali;

January 18, 2019 hearing date: Grace Marsh Dora Wohlstein

DECISION OF THE BOARD DELIVERED BY DAN WEAGANT

INTRODUCTION

1P.S., representing H.S. and G.S. (the "Applicants") filed an application to the Town of Newmarket (the "Town") to have their 2017 taxes reduced, cancelled or refunded because they were unable to pay due either to sickness or extreme poverty, under s. 357(7) of the Municipal Act. 2001, S.O. 2001, c. 25 (the "Act").

2The Town's Council has passed a By-law under s. 35711), delegating its authority in determining such applications to the Assessment Review Board (the "Board").

ISSUE

3The issue before the Board is whether or not the Applicant's 2017 property taxes should be cancelled, reduced or refunded due to her inability to pay because of sickness or extreme poverty. This requires the Board to determine a number of things. First the Board must determine, based on the evidence at the hearing, if the Applicants were unable to pay their 2017 property taxes. If the Board determines they were unable to pay their property taxes, the Board must then determine if the reason they were unable to pay was either sickness or extreme poverty.

4If the Board determines that the reason they were unable to pay was sickness or extreme poverty, the Board must then decide on the amount of the taxes levied to be cancelled, reduced or refunded.

DECISION

5The Applicants failed to demonstrate that they were unable to pay the property taxes levied in 2017. The Application is dismissed.

REASONS FOR THE DECISION

Were the Applicants able to pay the Property Taxes levied in 2017?

6At the outset of the hearing, P.S. submitted that the monthly family income in 2017 was approximately $3,770, made up of Canada Pension plan ("CPP") disability pension for P.S., disability payments from Manulife Insurance Company for G.S. and monthly payments from the Government of Canada for various tax credits and supports.

7There were four adults living at the subject property in 2017. Upon further review of the documents disclosed, a total annual household income for 2017 of $66,687 was revealed. This amount was made up of additional tax credits and supports from the Government of Canada and cash transfers into the checking account from other accounts that were not disclosed. In 2017, the checking account was held by P.S. and G.S.

8In addition to the income for P.S. and G.S., the Applicants also disclosed notices of assessment for H.S. and M.S. who were also living at the subject property in 2017. Net income for H.S. was $12,816.99. Net Income for M.S. was $23,527.79.

9The total household net income disclosed by the Applicant in 2017 was $103,032 (rounded), for a monthly average of $8,586.

10P.S. testified that monthly financial activity for the household is transacted through a single checking account. The balance on that account on January 1, 2017 was -$2,124.39. The balance on December 31, 2017 was -$3,685.42.

11The Town's records showed that the subject property has a current value of $747,000. The mortgage balance on the property in 2017 was approximately $293,000, in the form of a Line of Credit. The family had a single car in 2017, with no loans or leases payable. P.S. reported no other assets.

12Monthly expenses reported by the Applicants for 2017 totaled approximately $6,586 per month. These expenses are summarized as follows (all rounded to the nearest dollar):

• Mortgage payments - $1,045;

• House, car, extended health Insurance - $739;

• Groceries and household supplies and clothing - $1,198;

• Utilities (heat, hydro water and sewer) - $435;

• Car expenses - $344;

• Cell phone, telephone, cable and internet - $653;

• Charity Lotteries - $103;

• Property taxes - $179.

In addition, 2017 bank records in evidence show cash withdrawals of $377 per month, $904 per month in transfers to other accounts, and $699 per month in other expenses including discretionary expenses.

13P.S. submitted that she and her family had a difficult time meeting their obligations in 2017 and that a refund of the taxes paid would allow them to improve their standard of living. She testified that her spouse, G.S. became ill and unable to work prior to 2017. P.S. suffers from hearing loss and that is a barrier to employment.

The Town's Submissions

14The Town submitted that the evidence before the Board strongly suggested that the Applicant not only was able to pay her property taxes in 2017, the total income clearly indicates that monthly commitments are being met and that the monthly expenses declared by the Applicants were less per month than the household income.

15The Town submitted that the monthly expenses also include $179 for the payment of property taxes. It submitted further that the property tax account in the Town's records indicated a balance owing of $1,956 that could have been paid using some of the residual household income, including cash withdrawals and transfers to other accounts, after all reported expenses were paid.

The Board's Analysis

16Monthly finances are not the only measure used by the Board to determine if an Applicant was able to pay property taxes. The Board regularly reviews overall financial conditions, including mortgage and other debts owing, credit card debt and other loans or commitments.

17In this case, P.S. testified that there are no car loans. There was a credit card balance of approximately $2,000 throughout 2017. The line of credit principal amount is at approximately $293,000. It appears from the disclosed documents that interest only payments of approximately $1,045 per month are being applied to this account.

18While the P.S. and her family have made some questionable choices with respect to their finances, the Board has no jurisdiction to make findings of fault or bad judgement. However, the Board must make a decision as to the ability to pay property taxes in 2017.

19At the conclusion of the first hearing day, the Applicants were granted an adjournment to gather and submit to the Town and the Board some additional financial records including expenses for M.S. and H.S.

20When the second day was convened, some of the documents ordered by the Board were provided by the Applicants, but others were not. At the Town's urging, the Board allowed the Applicants some additional time to provide the missing documentary evidence. The Town offered to facilitate that process for the Applicants' convenience, and issued an email to the Applicants later that same day with a list of documents that were required by the Board. The Town's deadline for delivery passed without any response from the Applicants.

21As a result, the Board issued a final notice and deadline for delivery of the documents in question, advising the Applicants that failure to produce those documents by March 11, 2019 would force the Board to make a decision without those documents. The March 11, 2019 Board's deadline passed without communication from the Applicants.

22The documents disclosed by the Applicants clearly show that expenses in 2017 were approximately $24,000 less than the total household income. That is clear evidence that the Applicants were able to pay the property taxes. The application is therefore dismissed.