Assessment Review Board
Commission de révision de l’évaluation foncière
ISSUE DATE:
October 21, 2020
WR 166542
Assessed Person(s):
M.V.L.C.
Applicant(s):
R.M.
Respondent(s):
City of London
Property Location(s):
Address withheld
Municipality(ies):
City of London
Roll Number(s):
Roll number withheld
Appeal Number(s):
3395376
Taxation Year(s):
2019
Hearing Event No.:
735782
Legislative Authority:
Section 357(1)(d.1) of the Municipal Act, 2001, S.O. 2001, c. 25
APPEARANCES:
Parties
Representative
R.M.
No one appeared
City of London
Jim Edmunds and Brian Shimla
HEARD:
October 8, 2020 by telephone conference call
ADJUDICATOR(S):
Jean-Paul Pilon, Member
DECISION
1R.M. (the “Applicant”) filed an application with the City of London (the “Municipality”) to cancel, reduce or refund all or part of the taxes levied on land for the 2019 taxation year.
2Pursuant to section 357(11) of the Municipal Act, 2001, S.O. 2001, c.25, the Municipality delegated its authority to hear these applications to the Assessment Review Board (the “Board”) and, after receiving the application, the Board scheduled a pre-hearing teleconference. The purpose of this pre-hearing teleconference was to provide the parties with information about the full hearing that would be scheduled later, and to confirm what documents would be required to support the application.
3On September 4, 2020, the Board sent the parties notice of the pre-hearing teleconference that would take place on October 8, 2020 at 9:30 a.m. That notice contained a statement that “if you do not participate and are not represented at the start of the hearing (9:30 a.m.) the Board may proceed in your absence and may dismiss your appeals and you will not be entitled to any further notice of the proceedings.”
4The pre-hearing teleconference began as scheduled at 9:30 a.m. on September 4, 2020, with only representatives of the Municipality in attendance. Neither the Applicant nor the assessed owner had attended the hearing by 10:50 a.m. The representatives of the Municipality indicated that they had not heard from the Applicant or the assessed owner.
5The Municipality then brought a motion to dismiss the application because the Applicant had not attended to support the application. This request was granted and the application was deemed abandoned.
CONCLUSION
6The Board finds that the application has been abandoned and that it should therefore be dismissed.
ORDER
7The Board orders that this application be dismissed.
"Jean-Paul Pilon"
JEAN-PAUL PILON
MEMBER
Assessment Review Board
A constituent tribunal of Tribunals Ontario
Website: www.tribunalsontario.ca/arb
Telephone: 416-212-6349 Toll Free: 1-866-448-2248```