Homeowner’s Reduced Assessment Upheld by Appeals Court
Long Branch City unsuccessfully appealed the decision of a Tax Court judge which reduced the assessment on a residential home. The home at issue was built in 2008. At trial, the property owner’s valuation expert testified that he relied primarily on comparable sales from Deal Township, a neighboring municipality which he considered more desirable, and that he did not employ the cost approach to valuation because there were sufficient sales in total to determine a value of the subject property. At the end of the property owner’s case, the City moved to dismiss the case claiming the appraiser failed to rely on the City’s property record card, and there were discrepancies in the report regarding the house. Additionally, the City claimed the report was a net opinion filled with hearsay and speculation. The judge denied the motion, and the City’s assessor presented its valuation based solely on the cost approach because the home was recently built. Following the submission of all evidence, the Tax Court judge found that the property owner overcame the presumption of correctness which attaches to an assessment, and reduced the Subject Property’s assessment. The Appellate Division affirmed the Tax Court’s reduction.
A reduction in an assessment is only possible after a property owner rebuts the presumption of correctness granted to the assessment. To be successful, a property owner must present sufficient evidence to rebut the validity of the assessment, and then the burden is on the taxpayer to prove, by a preponderance of the evidence, that the assessment is erroneous. Ford Motor Co. v. Twp. of Edison, 127 N.J. 290, 312-315 (1992). The municipality will then have an opportunity to present its own evidence to support its value of the subject property before the judge weighs the evidence to decide which witness presents the more credible evidence and establish an assessment based on the information before the court.
The Appellate Division’s unpublished opinion in Michele Bailey-Horovits v. Long Branch City may be viewed by clicking here.
In order to contest a 2014 assessment, appeals must be filed by April 1, 2014, unless a municipality is undergoing a municipal-wide reassessment or revaluation or later filing deadline is ordered. In addition, 2014 appeals can no longer be filed directly with the Monmouth County Board of Taxation, as a special early deadline for that County has already passed. If an appeal is not filed on time, the opportunity for lower taxes in 2014 may be lost. For a complimentary evaluation to determine the viability of pursuing a tax appeal on your behalf, or for additional information concerning property tax appeals, please contact McKirdy & Riskin partner Thomas Olson, Esq. at 973-539-8900, or via email at tolson@mrod.law.
See our related prior blog posts:
Mayor Voting with His Feet: Selling house because his taxes are too high
Taxpayer Fails to Overcome “Presumption of Correctness”
Ailing Seller Not Considered Arms’ Length Sale Participant for Comparable Sales Analysis
