Tribunals Ontario

Tribunaux décisionnels Ontario

Assessment Review Board

Commission de révision de l’évaluation foncière

ISSUE DATE:

January 15, 2021

FILE NO.:

DM 167942

Moving Party(s):

2305105 Ontario Inc.

Respondent(s):

Municipal Property Assessment Corporation Region 7

Respondent(s):

City of Peterborough

Property Location(s):

2300 Denure Drive

Municipality(ies):

City of Peterborough

Roll Number(s):

1514-020-010-07281-0000

Taxation Year(s):

2018

Hearing Event No.:

737367

Legislative Authority:

Rules 5, 6, 7 and 26(b) of the Assessment Review Board’s Rules of Practice and Procedure.

Parties

Representative

2305105 Ontario Inc.

Peter Bajc

Municipal Property Assessment Corporation

Kailey Langille

City of Peterborough

Submissions not received

REQUEST FOR:

Late appeal

HEARD:

December 3, 2020 in writing

ADJUDICATOR(S):

Joanne Laws, Member

MOTION DECISION

OVERVIEW

12305105 Ontario Inc. (the “Moving Party”) brings this motion seeking an order permitting the late filing of its appeals for the 2018 taxation year pursuant to s. 26(b) of the Assessment Review Board’s (the “Board”) Rules of Practice and Procedures (the “Rules”). The Municipal Property Assessment Corporation (“MPAC”) opposes the motion for a late appeal. No submissions were received from the City of Peterborough.

2In the alternative, the Moving Party seeks to revise its 2019 appeal, filed pursuant to s. 40 of the Assessment Act (the “Act) to 2018 appeals of MPAC’s notices of omitted assessments. MPAC takes no position on this request.

3Three affidavits were filed by the Parties. The Moving Party filed two affidavits of Peter Bajc, a Senior Consultant with Altus Group Tax Consulting Paralegal Professional Corporation (“Altus”). One was sworn on January 29, 2020 and the other was sworn on November 11, 2020. MPAC filed the third affidavit, of Tom Elliott, a Senior Case Management Analyst with MPAC, affirmed on November 24, 2020.

4For the reasons set out below:

a. The motion to file late appeals for the 2018 taxation year is denied.

b. The Board permits a revision of the 2019 s. 40 appeal to 2018 s. 33 appeals.

Issues for the Hearing

5At issue in this proceeding is whether the Moving Party satisfies the requirements for filing a late appeal pursuant to the Board’s Rule 26(b) and, if not, whether a revision of an existing appeal is appropriate.

Background

6The Property, a seniors’ residence, is located at 2300 Denure Drive in the City of Peterborough. On October 30, 2018 MPAC issued Property Assessment Change Notices (“PACN”) for 2017 and 2018 omitted assessments pursuant to s. 33 of the Act. On November 27, 2018 MPAC issued a Property Assessment Notice for 2019.

7The Property is assessed in the Residential Property Class and s. 40(3) of the Act requires that a Request for Reconsideration (“RfR”) is made to MPAC before an appeal can be filed with this Board. The affidavit evidence is that RfRs were filed with MPAC for both the 2018 and 2019 taxation years in accordance with the timelines set out in s. 39.1 of the Act.

8MPAC responded to both RfRs confirming the returned assessed values for both the 2018 and 2019 taxation years. Subsequently, Mr. Bajc filed an appeal for the 2019 taxation year with this Board in accordance with s. 40.(5)1 of the Act. Mr. Bajc affirms that his intention was to appeal the 2018 omitted assessments with the knowledge that a 2019 taxation year appeal would then be deemed by this Board (see s. 40.(26) of the Act). Mr. Bajc affirms that on January 28, 2020 he realized his error and, on that same day, requested permission from this Board to file late appeals for the 2018 taxation year.

Does the Moving Party Meet the Requirements of Rule 26(b)?

9Rule 26(b) of the Board’s Rules provides:

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.

10The wording of Rule 26(b) indicates that all three tests must be met: that the person was entitled to receive a notice of assessment, that the person did not receive the notice and that the person filed a request for a late appeal within 30 days of becoming aware of the assessment or classification.

11There is no dispute that the Moving Party is entitled to receive a 2018 notice of assessment. The first part of the test has been satisfied.

12There is no dispute that the Moving Party received a notice of assessment for the 2018 tax year, which is illustrated by the Moving Party filing an RfR in response to the notice. Accordingly, the second part of the test has not been satisfied.

13Because the second part of the test was not met, the third part of the test could not be satisfied.

14The Moving Party has not satisfied two of the three tests set out in Rule 26(b). Accordingly, the motion to file late appeals is denied.

Should the 2019 s. 40 appeal be revised to reflect 2018 appeals?

15If its motion to file a late appeal is denied, the Moving Party requests that its 2019 appeal be revised to reflect the intended 2018 tax year. MPAC takes no position on the Moving Party’s request.

16Based on its undisputed evidence, I am satisfied that a clerical error occurred when Mr. Bajc completed the appeal form, that he intended to appeal the 2018 omitted assessments and that he inadvertently entered the incorrect taxation year on the appeal form.

17I find that the appeal form received by this Board is in substantial compliance with the requirements of these Rules, including Rule 18 which outlines the form of an appeal. Denying the relief sought would be contrary to Rule 7 which provides that “[s]ubstantial compliance with the requirements of these Rules is sufficient” and Rule 4 which provides that [t]hese Rules shall be liberally interpreted to ensure the just… determination of every proceeding”.

18Pursuant to Rule 6, I direct the Board to revise the 2019 s. 40 appeal to 2018 s. 33 appeals.

ORDER

19The motion to file late appeals for the 2018 taxation year is denied.

20The request to revise the 2019 s. 40 appeal to 2018 s. 33 appeals is granted.