H.S. and V.M. v. City of Toronto, 2019 CanLII 81688

Assessment Review Board

Commission de révision de l’évaluation foncière

ISSUE DATE:

August 27, 2019

FILE NO.:

WR 161643

Assessed Person(s):

H.S.

Applicant(s):

H.S. and V.M.

Respondent(s):

City of Toronto

Property Location(s):

Withheld

Municipality(ies):

City of Toronto

Roll Number(s):

Withheld

Appeal Number(s):

3369362

Taxation Year(s):

2018

Hearing Event No.:

717867

Legislative Authority:

Section 323.(1)(e) of the City of Toronto Act, 2006, S.O. 2006, c. 11, Sched. A

Heard:

July 11, 2019 in Toronto, Ontario

APPEARANCES:

Parties

Counsel⁺/Representative

H.S. and V.M.

Self-represented

City of Toronto

Jennifer Boyczuk⁺, Melanie Shankar

DECISION OF THE BOARD DELIVERED BY DAN WEAGANT

INTRODUCTION

1H.S. filed an application to the City of Toronto (“City”) to have his 2018 property taxes reduced, cancelled or refunded because he was unable to pay due either to sickness or extreme poverty, under s. 323(1)(e) of the City of Toronto Act, 2006, S.O. 2006 c. 11, Sched. A (“Act”).

2The City has passed a by-law, delegating its authority to determine such applications to the Assessment Review Board (“Board”) under s. 323(11) of the Act.

ISSUE

3The issue before the Board is whether or not the Applicant’s 2018 property taxes should be cancelled, reduced or refunded because of the Applicant’s inability to pay for the reason 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 Applicant was unable to pay his 2018 property taxes. If the Board determines he was unable to pay his property taxes, the Board must then determine if the reason he was unable to pay was either sickness or extreme poverty.

4If the Board determines that the reason he was 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 Board finds that the Applicant did not demonstrate that he was unable to pay the property taxes in 2018. The Application is dismissed.

REASONS FOR THE DECISION

Was the Applicant able to pay the Property Taxes levied in 2018?

6In 2018, the Applicant lived with his spouse and their two young children at the subject property. The 2018 property taxes levied were $1,709.05. The Applicant reported a total annual, family income for 2018 of $47,016 or $3,918 per month (rounded). This monthly income was generated as follows:

• Ontario Disability Support Program: $1,469
• GST / HST Rebates: $39
• CPP Pension: $1,019
• Child tax benefits: $1,297
• Canada / Provincial Transfers: $94

7The Applicant reported that monthly financial activity for the household is transacted through a single checking account. The balance on that account on January 1, 2018 was $3,562.47. The balance on December 31, 2018 was $2,619.61.

8In 2018, The Applicant testified that the value of the subject property was approximately $380,000, with $159,577 in principal yet to be paid on the mortgage. The family owns a 2001 Ford pickup truck that is used for the family’s transportation needs. There is little value attributed to this vehicle by the Applicant.

9Monthly expenses reported by the Applicant for 2018 totaled approximately $4,104 per month. These expenses are summarized as follows (all rounded to the nearest dollar):

• Mortgage payments - $669
• Home and auto Insurance - $97
• Condominium fees - $441
• Groceries - $1,271
• Household supplies - $65
• Transit - $30
• Clothing - $55
• Car expenses - $437
• Cell phone, telephone, cable and internet - $96
• Medications not covered by social programs - $800
• Property taxes - $143

10The Applicant testified that he has been ill since 2001 when he was diagnosed with numerous conditions that, in the opinions of two physicians, render him unable to work. The Applicant submitted the City of Toronto’s “Form 2 – Doctor’s Statement” which very clearly indicates the Applicant, in the opinion of his physician, will never be able to resume working.

11The Applicant and his spouse both testified as to the effects of the Applicant’s health condition. According to both witnesses, the Applicant’s conditions do not allow him to be left alone for any length of time because his symptoms can be life threatening unless medical help can arrive quickly. They indicated that Emergency Medical Services made frequent trips to the Applicant’s address in 2018.

12Regular activities like shopping or walking in the neighbourhood can cause reactions for the Applicant that make this kind of activity dangerous for him. Because the Applicant is so reliant on others, his spouse is not able to work because she is needed as his care giver.

The City’s Submissions

13The City did not take a position on the application, except to note the following:

• This provision of the Act is meant to be a temporary measure to assist those in need over a short period of time. This Applicant was successful in the 2017 taxation year under the same application and the Board should consider that in its finding;
• The amount of gasoline claimed for the 2001 truck of $270 per month seems to be higher than usual; and
• The Applicant has shown that while the family resources are relatively meagre, the necessities of life are being met, and the taxes were paid in 2018. This suggest that the Applicant was able to pay taxes in 2018.

The Board’s Analysis

14The Applicant’s monthly income is approximately $186 less than expenses. The Board notes that, even if the Applicant hadn’t paid his property taxes, his monthly expenses would have exceeded income by approximately $43.

15The Board also notes that the family bank account ended the year with a balance of $2,619.61, after the taxes were paid. While this is not a large balance for a family of four, it represents an amount of money equal to approximately 150% of the taxes levied in 2018. This balance existed after the taxes were paid in 2018. The fact that the family has been able to pay the 2018 property taxes and still maintain this bank balance indicates that the family had the ability to pay property taxes.

16For these reasons, the Board finds that the Applicant has not demonstrated an inability to pay the property taxes in 2018. The application is dismissed.