Assessment Review Board

Commission de révision de l’évaluation foncière

ISSUE DATE: April 15, 2020

FILE NO.: WR 164194

Assessed Person(s): Charlene Lagrave

Appellant(s): Charlene Lagrave

Respondent(s): Municipal Property Assessment Corporation, Region 15

Respondent(s): City of Mississauga

Property Location(s): 4180 Marblethorne Crt

Municipality(ies): City of Mississauga

Roll Number(s): 2105-030-096-71300-0000

Appeal Number(s): 3386665 and 3406037

Taxation Year(s): 2019 and 2020

Hearing Event No.: 729305

APPEARANCES:

Parties	Representative
Charlene Lagrave	No one appeared
Municipal Property Assessment Corporation	Tanya Janeczek-Boyle
City of Mississauga	Gary Leung

HEARD: February 25, 2020 by telephone conference call

ADJUDICATOR(S): Dirk VanderBent, Vice-Chair

DECISION

1Charlene Lagrave is the owner of 4180 Marblethorne Crt., Mississauga (the “Subject Property”), which is a residential property.

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.

3MPAC has assessed the value of the Subject Property at $1,173,000 for the 2019 taxation year, and at $1,071,000 for the 2020 taxation year. Ms. Lagrave (the “Appellant”) filed an appeal for the 2019 taxation year with the Assessment Review Board (the “Board”), pursuant to s. 40 of the Act. Pursuant to s. 40(26) of the Act, the Appellant is deemed to have brought the same appeal in respect of the 2020 taxation year. It is her position that MPAC’s assessment of current value is too high.

4The Board scheduled a hearing of this appeal on February 25, 2020. However, as Ms. Lagrave did not appear, the Board made an Oral Disposition dismissing her appeal. Ms. Lagrave subsequently contacted the Board requesting that Written Reasons be provided. The purpose of this Decision is to provide these written reasons.

ANALYSIS

5The Board sent a written Notice of Hearing to Ms. Lagrave on January 24, 2020. This Notice confirmed that the hearing would be conducted by a Telephone Conference Call (“TCC”). In the week prior to the scheduled hearing date, Ms. Lagrave submitted a written request to the Board asking that the hearing be conducted in-person. On February 21, 2020, the Board sent an email to the parties setting out its disposition denying this request. Therefore, it appears that Ms. Lagrave did receive the Notice of Hearing and was aware the hearing would proceed on February 21, 2020.

6The hearing commenced by TCC at the scheduled 1:30 p.m. start time as set out in the Notice of Hearing. Representatives from both MPAC and the City of Mississauga joined the TCC. Ms. Lagrave did not join the call, nor did she notify the Board in advance that could not do so. In an effort to determine whether she intended to participate in the hearing, the Board then requested that the Board’s Case Coordinator contact Ms. Lagrave. Over the next half hour, the Case Co-Ordinator phoned and emailed Ms. Lagrave, and then followed up with a second phone call. The Case Coordinator confirmed to the Board that no one answered the phone and that she did not receive a response to her email.

7In summary: a Notice of the Hearing was provided; Ms. Lagrave gave no prior notice to the Board that she would be unable to attend the hearing; the Board waited 30 minutes to provide Ms. Lagrave with an opportunity to appear; and the Board made reasonable efforts to attempt to communicate with Ms. Lagrave once the hearing commenced. In these circumstances, Ms. Lagrave, without any explanation, did not proceed with her appeal as required by the Board. Therefore, the Board dismissed her appeal.

ORDER

8Ms. Lagrave’s appeals for the 2019 and 2020 taxation years are dismissed.