HomeMy WebLinkAbout03-5998IN RE: APPEAL OF MAHMOOD
& BONNIE MOHAMMAD, TAX
PENNSYLVANIA
PARCEL # 29-05-0425-126
IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS OF
CUMBERLAND COUNTY,
CIVIL ACTION - LAW
03- ~qW]~ - CIVIL TERM
ASSESSMENT APPEAL
PETITION FOR APPEAL FROM THE WRITTEN DECISION OF THE
CUMBERLAND COUNTY BOARD OF ASSESSMENT APPEALS
Appellants, Mabanood and Bonnie Mohammad, hereby file this Petition for Appeal from
the written decision of the Ctunberland County Board of Assessment Appeals based upon the
following statement of fact and assertions of law:
1. Appellants are adult individuals who own improved real estate located at 511 Pleasant
Hall Road, North Middleton Township, Cumberland County, Pennsylvania, Tax Parcel number
29-05-0425-126 (hereinafter referred to as the "subject tax parcel").
2. Appellees are the Board of Assessment Appeals of the County of Cumberland, the
Board of Commissioners of the County of Cumberland, North Middleton Township and the
Carlisle School District, all within the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania.
3. On or about July 1, 2003, Appellants received a Tax Notice from the Cumberland
County Assessment Office advising the assessed value of the subject tax parcel had increased on
unimproved property to improved property from $150,000 to $1,495,030 (hereinafter referred to
as the "Tax Notice"). A copy of the Tax Notice is attached hereto as Exhibit "A" and is
incorporated herein by reference.
4. On July 3, 2003, Appellants filed an Assessment Appeal from the Tax Notice
regarding the subject tax parcel for the current tax year, 2003.
5. An Assessment Appeal heating was held on October 27, 2003 before the Cumberland
County Board of Assessment Appeals.
6. On October 29, 2003, the Cumberland County Board of Assessment Appeals mailed
written notice of its decision in which it revised the assessment based on the Hearing from a total
of $1,495,030 to $1,030,000. A copy of the Decision Order of the Cumberland County Board of
Assessment Appeals is attached hereto as Exhibit "B" and is incorporated herein by reference.
7. The written decision of the Cumberland County Board of Assessment Appeals mailed
on October 29, 2003 is an error of law and abuse of discretion for the following reasons:
a. The assessment of the subject tax parcel is substantially higher than
assessments of similar properties in the adjacent community and taxing districts within
the County of Cumberland;
b. The assessment of the subject tax parcel fails to recognize the non-conforming
use status of the subject tax parcel and limitations negatively impacting the value of the
subject tax parcel;
c. The assessment of the subject tax parcel is erroneously based upon the
testimony of Assessor's office, which did not present equal testimony as to the three
customary approaches to value, namely sales comparable, income capitalization and costs
as required by Rule and Regulation 5.14 of the Cumberland County Assessment Rules
2
and Regulations;
d. The assessment of the subject tax parcel is based upon whole or in part upon
the appraisal (or appraisals) of the subject tax parcel that does not represent the actual value of
the subject tax parcel;
e. The assessment of the subject tax parcel is arbitrary and capricious when
related to county assessments of similarly situated property and activities of the nature of the
subject tax parcel;
f. The assessment of the subject tax parcel is unequal when compared to
assessments of properties of the same class as the subject tax parcel;
g. The assessment of the subject tax parcel violates the Equal Protection Clause
of the 14th Amendment to the United States Constitution;
h. The assessment of the subject tax parcel violates the uniformity clause of
Pennsylvania Constitution and related law;
i. The assessment of the subject tax parcel violates the guaranty of equality in tax
treatment directed by the Pennsylvania Constitution and related law;
j. The assessment of the subject tax parcel lacks uniformity when compared to
assessments of properties of the same class as the subject tax parcel;
k. The ratio of the assessed value of the subject tax parcel as to the actual value
3
of the subject tax parcel in establishing the assessed value is excessive and exceeds the ratio
applied throughout the taxing authority; and
1. The assessment of the subject tax parcel is otherwise unjust and inequitable.
8. The decision of the Cumberland County Board of Assessment Appeals mailed
October 29, 2003 is an error of law and abuse of discretion where written reports and appraisals
were submitted by the Cumberland County Assessment office on the day of the heating without
the opportunity for Appellant's advance review and contrary to the stated Rules and Regulations
promulgated by the Cumberland Cotmty Board of Assessment Appeals, namely Section 5.07
9. The decision of the Cumberland County Board of Assessment Appeals mailed
October 29, 2003 is an error of law, abuse of discretion or without authority of law or rule where
the Board failed to take into account the fair market appraisal as was submitted to it for its
consideration using comparable market values and independently obtained assessments
rendering the true value as $850,000.
10. A proposed Order of Court scheduling a hearing is attached hereto as Exhibit "C".
4
WHEREFORE, Petitioners/Appellants respectfully request that this Honorable Court
reverse the decision of the Cumberland County Board of Assessment Appeals for the reasons
stated herein, reduce the assessment and thereafter make any and all appropriate Orders of the
Court and Decrees to effectuate said determination.
Date: November 11, 2003
Respectfully submitted.
Mahmood Mohammad, Appellant
Bonnie Mohammad, Appellant
511 Pleasant Hall Road
Carlisle, PA 17013
(717) 218-0874
5
EXHIBIT "A"
EXHIBIT
EXHIBIT
A-2
EXHIBIT "B"
Cumberland County Board of Assessment Appeals
Old Courthouse
One Courthouse Square
Carlisle, PA 17013
(717) 240-6350
(717) 240-6354 (fax)
Board of Assessment Appeals
Lloyd W. Bucher
R. Fred Hefelfinger
Sarah Hu§hes
BONNIE M. MAHONEY
Chief Assessor
STEPHEN D. TILEY
A~sis~ant Solicitor
DECISION ORDER
MAILING DATE: October 29, 2003
PARCEL NUMBER: 29-05-0425-126.
MOHAMMAD, MAHMOOD
& BONNIE
511 PLEASANT HALL ROAD
CARLISLE PA 17013
Dear Property Owner:
This letter is to officially notify you of the decision of the Cumberland County Board of Assessment Appeals
regarding the above-referenced parcel.
DATE OF APPEAL HEARING: 10/27/2003
DATE DECISION RENDERED: 10/29/2003
EFFECTIVE FOR TAX YEAR: 2003
DECISION RENDERED:
[ ] Withdrawn By Applicant
[ ] Abandoned For Failure To Appear
[ ] Denied - No Change
[ ] Approved Review Appraiser's Changes
[X] Revised Assessment Based on Hearing
[ ] Other:
TOTAL VALUE
Old Assessed Value:
New Assessed Value:
FAiR MARKET CLEAN AND GREEN CLEAN AND GREEN
STATUS
1,495,030 1,363,300 Enrolled
1,030,000 896,270 Enroiled
Any person aggrieved by the orOer of the Board of Assessment may appeal to the Court of Common
Pleas by filing a petition in the Prothonotary's office on or before November 26, 2003.(Please note:
CurnDerland County Courthouae ia closed Thursday, Nov. 27, 2003 end Friday, Nov. 28, 2003.
Therefore all appeals must be filed on or before Monday, Dec. 1, 2003.)
EXHIBIT
EXHIBIT "C"
VERIFICATION
I verify that the statements made in this Assessment Appeal are true and correct. I
understand that false statements herein are made subject to penalties of 18 Pa. C. S. A. Section
4904, relating to unswom falsification to authorities.
Date: November 1 l, 2003
Mahmood Mohammad
VERIFICATION
I verify that the statements made in this Assessment Appeal are true and correct. I
understand that false statements herein are made subject to penalties of 18 Pa. C. S. A. Section
4904, relating to unsworn falsification to authorities.
Date: November l 1, 2003
Bonnie Mohammad
1N RE: APPEAL OF MAHMOOD
& BONNIE MOHAMMED, TAX
PENNSYLVANIA
PARCEL #29-05-0425-136
IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS OF
CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA
CIVIL ACTION - LAW
03-5998 CIVIL
ASSESSMENT APPEAL
ORDER
AND NOW, this .~ s- - day of November, 2003, hearing in the above captioned
matter set for February 20, 2004, is continued to Thursday, March 25, 2004, at 9:30 a.m. in
Courtroom Number 4, Cumberland County Courthouse, Carlisle, PA.
BY THECOURT,
Mahmood & Bonnie Mohammed
511 Pleasant Hall Road
Carlisle, PA 17013
Stephen Tiley, Esquire
For Cumberland County
y,~A. Hess, J.
:tim
IN RE: APPEAL OF MAHMOOD
& BONNIE MOHAMMAD, TAX
PENNSYLVANIA
PARCEL # 29-05-0425-126
IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS OF
CUMBERLAND COUNTY,
CIVIL ACTION - LAW
03- --~9~' - CIVIL TERM
ASSESSMENT APPEAL
Order of the Cour~
AND NOW, this2.fft~ z~ day of'.~f~.,/~/~,/.~j, 2003, upon consideration of Appellants'
Petition for Appeal of the Written decision of the Cumberland Connty Board of Assessment
Appeals, a hearing is scheduled for the
~o'clock ~ ..m., in Courtroom
Carlisle, Pennsylvania.
_day or~?, 200~
_at the Cumberland County Courthouse,
~ahmood and Bonnie Mohammad
511 Pleasant Hall Road
Car/isle, PA 17013
Appellants
t~ephen D. Tiley, Esquire
5 South Hanover Street
Carlisle, PA 17013
Attorney for Board of Assessment Appeals
North Middleton Township, and
Carlisle Area School District.
BY THE COURT,
IN RE: APPEAL OF MAHMOOD
& BONNIE MOHAMMED, TAX
PARCEL #29-05-0425-126
APPEAL FROM THE CUMBERLAND
COUNTY BOARD OF ASSESSMENT
IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS OF
CUMEERLAND COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA
CIVIL ACTION - LAW
2003-5998 CIVIL
ASSESSMENT APPEAL
ANSWER
AND NOW, comes the Cumberland County Board of Assessment Appeals and the
County of Cumberland, by Stephen D. Tiley, Assistant Cumberland County Solicitor for
tax matters, and files this Answer to the Petition for Appeal from the Written Decision of
the Cumberland County Board of Assessment Appeals filed Jin the above captioned matter,
of which the following is a statement:
1. Admitted.
2. Admitted.
3. Admitted in part. Denied in part. It is admitted that the taxpayer ultimately
received a Change of Assessment Notice indicating a total assessment value of $1,495,030.
The Assessment Office does not send "Tax Notices" and the materials attached as Exhibit
"A" to the Petition came from the tax collector, not the Assessment Office. The taxpayer
did not receive a notice in 2003 increasing the total assessment from $150,000 to
$1,495,030, but rather received a June 30, 2003 Change of Assessment Notice increasing
Mohmood & Bonnie Mohammed Appeal Page 1 of 4
the total assessment from $208,490 to $1,495,030. By way of further Answer, this property
was assessed a vacant ground on July 26, 2001 in the amount of $148,490. On July 1, 2002
a Change of Assessment Notice was sent increasing the assessment to a total of $208,490
due to the construction of a garage. The June 30, 2003 Change of Assessment Notice was
the result of the construction of a new house on the property. All of the foregoing figures
reflect the gross assessment of the property, before reduction in assessment due to the
property participating in the Clean and Green preferential assessment program.
4. Admitted in part. Denied in pan. It is admitted that Appellants filed a
timely assessment appeal to the Board of Assessment Appeals. That appeal was received
on July 9, 2003. That appeal having been filed within 40 days of the June 30, 2003 change
of assessment notice, any decision rendered in that appeal (and this appeal to Court) relates
back to the date of such change of assessment notice. It is denied, however, that any
decision in that appeal, or this case, would effect the assessment of the subject parcel prior
to the effective date of that Change of Assessment Notice.
5. Admitted.
6. Admitted. By way of further Answer, the within appeal being de novo, the
assessment appealed to the Court of Common Pleas is now the original assessment fixed by
the Assessment Office, to wit: $1,495,030. (Taxpayer's 2004 bills reflect the $1,030,000
decision and the preferential Clean and Green assessment, but the pre-existing assessment
of $1,495,030 is applicable to this appeal.)
Mohmood & Bonnie Mohammed Appeal Page 2 of 4
7. Denied. The averments of this paragraph, and its individual sub-paragraphs,
are denied as conclusions of law to which no responsive pleading is required. Strict proof
at trial of the case is demanded.
8. Denied. The averments of this paragraph are denied as conclusions of law
to which no responsive pleading is required. By way of further Answer, the testimony by
the Assessment Office was not in violation of Board Rule 5.07 as that Rule is inapplicable
to the Assessment Office. Reference is made to Board Rule 5.14 and the testimony of the
Assessment Office was consistent with such Rule. In any event, the testimony at the Board
Hearing is irrelevant as the within appeal is de novo.
9. Denied. The averments of this paragraph set forth conclusions of law to
which no responsive pleading is required.
10. Denied. Respondent has no objection to Petitioner submitting a proposed
Order, however, none was attached as Exhibit "C" to the Petition as filed.
WHEREFORE, Respondent, Cumberland County Bnard of Assessment Appeals
and County of Cumberland, prays Your Honorable Court for an Order denying Appellant's
appeal, fixing the assessment at $1,495,030, or fixing the assessment at such other amount
as to the Court may deem just and proper.
Mohmood & Bonnie Mohammed Appeal Page 3 of 4
Dated:
Respectfully submitted,
Stephen IY. Tiley, Esquire
Attorney for Respondent
5 South Hanover Street
Carlisle, PA 17013
(717) 243-5838
Supreme Court I.D.#32318
VERIFICATION
I verify that the statements made in the foregoing Answer are true and correct,
partially upon personal knowledge and partially upon my belief; to the extent language in
the Answer is that of my attorneys, I have relied upon my attorneys in making this
Verification. I understand that false statements herein are made and subject to the
penalties of 18 Pa. C.S. §4904 relating to unswom falsification to authorities.
Dated: ,~/7 2-?/7~
Mohmood & Bonnie Mohammed Appeal Page 4 of 4
IN RE: APPEAL OF MAHMOOD
& BONNIE MOHAMMAD, TAX
PENNSYLVANIA
PARCEL # 29-05-0425-136
: IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS OF
: CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA
:
: CIVIL ACTION - LAW
: 03-5998 CIVIL,
: ASSESSMENT APPEAL
ORDER
AND NOW, this ~ day of March, 2004, upon request of counsel for the
Appellants in the above matter and it being related to the court that the County through it's
Attorney Stephen D. Tiley does not object to the request for continuance, the hearing
scheduled for March 25, 2004 is cancelled and rescheduled until theo~'~ay of ~7/x~- ,
2004 at ~ ;~ O~,..m. in courtroom 4 of the Cumberland County Courthouse in Carlisle,
Pennsylvania.
Judge ~e/vin A. Hess
/
CC:
st bert X. Giiroy, Esqu. ire
phen D. Tiley, Esqmre
IN RE: APPEAL OF MAHMOOD
& BONNIE MOHAMMAD, TAX
PENNSYLVANIA
PARCEL # 29-05-0425-136
: 1N THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS OF
: CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA
:
: CIVIL ACTION - LAW
: 03-5998 CIVIL
: ASSESSMENT APPEAL
ORDER
AND NOW, this ~Tn/day of ~'~ ,2004, upon agreement of the parties,
the hearing in the above case that was rescheduled until May 26, 2004 is cancelled and now
rescheduled for Friday, June 18, 2004 at 9:30 a.m. in Courtroom 4 of the Cumberland County
Conrthouse.
in A. Hess
Hubert X. Gilroy, Esquire
Stephen D. Tiley, Esquire
IN RE: APPEAL OF MAHMOOD
& BONNIE MOHAMMED, TAX
PARCEL #29-05-0425-126
APPEAL FROM THE CUMBERLAND
COUNTY BOARD OF ASSESSMENT
: IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS
: CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA
: CIVIL ACTION - LAW
: 2003-5998 CIVIL
: ASSESSMENT APPEAL
ENTRY OF APPEAR~C~
To The Prothonotary:
We enter our appearance for North Middleton Township with
respect to the above-captioned matter.
One West Main Street
Shiremanstown, PA 17011
(717) 737-8761
Jennifer B. mzpp, Esquire
Attorney I.D. No. 86556
One West Main Street
Shiremanstown, PA 17011
(717) 737-8761
April 14, 2004
Solicitors for North Middleton
Townshiu,
JUN 1 6 ZOO4
IN RE: APPEAL OF MAHMOOD
& BONNIE MOHAMMAD, TAX
PENNSYLVANIA
PARCEL # 29-05-0425-136
APPEAL FROM THE CUMBERLAND
COUNTY BOARD OF ASSESSMENT
IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS OF
CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA
CIVIL ACTION - LAW
2003-5998 CIVIL
ASSESSMENT APPEAL
ORDER
AND NOW, this /1~' da)' of June, 2004, upon agreement of the parties, the hearing
scheduled in the above case for Friday, June 18, 2004 is continued generally to be rescheduled
again at the request of any of the parties.
Date
Jud~~./n~. /'~
Hess
ec'
Hubert X. Gilroy, Esquire
Stephen D. Tiley, Esquire
James D. Flower, Esquire
James D. Bogar, Esquire
TRUE COPY FROM R~RO
tn Te~tlfn0~y-t~reol, I her~'set my hand
~nd the seal o{ ~ ~ C~'~le, Pa.
Prothonot~r¢
IN RE: APPEAL OF MAHMOOD
& BONNIE MOHAMMED, TAX
PARCEL #29-05-0425-126
IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS OF
CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA
APPEAL FROM THE CUMBERLAND
COUNTY BOARD OF ASSESSMENT
CIVIL ACTION - LAW
2003-5998 CIVIL
ASSESSMENT APPEAL
AND NOW, this y
ORDER __
,.~ hflO
day of . _, 200~, upon consideration of the within
Stipulation and Joint Motion for Agreed Order, it is Decreed and Ordered that the total market
value of the subject property (Tax Parcel No. 29-05-0425-126) as of the date applicable to this
proceeding, is $900,000.00. The common level ratio not varying by more than 15% from the
predetermined ratio of 100%, the total assessment of the ProlX:rty for taxes imposed on June 30,
2003, and thereafter, until changed as provided by law, shall be $900,000.00. The Cumberland
County Assessment Office shall allocate said total assessment between land and improvements
as provided by law, and by the procedures of the Cumberland County Assessment Office. The
Cumberland County Assessment Office shall promptly notify the appropriate taxing bodies of
the change in assessment.
BY THE COURT,
By:
4;1
Tf~yt1
~~ ~ ~ \
ir~l :.
~-f>~ ~
, C>
0<)
~) ~
. .
rc' .;!' 'c'
~.,J . i I '_:.1 ['> r ~1 J
,. c - ::':.1-' ~G[jZ
.~
IN RE: APPEAL OF MAHMOOD
& BONNIE MOHAMMED, TAX
PARCEL #29-05-0425-126
IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS OF
: CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA
APPEAL FROM THE CUMBERLAND
COUNTY BOARD OF ASSESSMENT
CIVIL ACTION - LAW
2003-5998 CIVIL
ASSESSMENT APPEAL
STIPULATION AND JOINT MOTION FOR AGREED ORDER
AND NOW, this c;;tJr.!>.- day of --. 2004, it is he,reby agreed and stipulated between
Petitioner, Mahmood and Bonnie Mohammed, by their attorney, Hubert X. Gilroy, Esquire; and
Respondent, Cumberland County Board of Assessment Appeals and County of Cumberland, by
Stephen D. Tiley, Esquire, Assistant Cumberland County Solicitor for tax matters; and Carlisle
Area School District, by James D. Flower, Jr., Esquire; and North Middleton Township, by
James D. Bogar, Esquire; is as follows:
1. On or about November 18, 2003, Petitioner began this action by filing a "Petition
for Appeal from the Written Decision of the Cumberland County Board of Assessment Appeals."
By Order dated November 20, 2003, the Court fixed a Hearing date of February 20,2004. By
Order dated November 25, 2003 the Court continued the Hearing to March 25, 2004. By Order
dated March 23, 2004 the Court continued the Hearing to May 26, 2004. By Order dated April
2,2004 the Court continued the Hearing date to June 18,2004. The parties have now settled this
case.
2. This matter began with an appeal filed to the Board of Assessment Appeals on
July 9, 2003 as a result of a change of assessment notice dated June 30, 2003. The June 30, 2003
notice being a "Change of Assessment Notice" and the Petitioner having filed their appeal within
40 days of that Notice, the effective date of this appeal is June 30, 2003.
Stipulation and Joint Motion for Agreed Order
Mahmood and Bonnie Mohammed Page 1 of 4
3. The property which is subject to this appeal is known as Cumberland County Tax
Parcel No. 29-05-0425-126 and is a personal residence known as and numbered 511 Pleasant
Hall Road, Carlisle, Pennsylvania 17013, situate in North Middleton Township.
4 (a) The parties stipulate that the total market value of the subject property as of
the effective date of this appeal to the Cumberland County Board of Assessment Appeals shall
be fixed at $900,000.00.
4 (b) For the purposes of this Settlement Stipulation only, the parties agree that the
gross living area of the residence portion of the improvement, on the subject property is 5,268
square feet. The parties shall not be bound to that square footage figure in imposing any future
assessment on the property.
5. The common level ratio applicable to this app~:al is 95.4%, but is inapplicable as it
does not vary by more than 15% from the predetermined ratio. As a result of the year 2000
Cumberland Countywide Reassessment, the predetermined ratio for Cumberland County is now
100% of year 2000 market value. Therefore, the assessment for the subject property shall be
$900,000.00.
6. The Cumberland County Assessor's Office shall allocate the total assessment
between land and improvements as provided by law and the procedures of the Cumberland
County Assessment Office.
7. The new assessment shall be effective for all taxes imposed on and after June 30,
2003.
8. The Cumberland County Assessment Office shall promptly notify the appropriate
taxing bodies of the change in assessment, and instruct the taxing bodies to make appropriate
refunds.
9. Each party to this appeal shall bear its own costs.
Stipulation and Joint Motion for Agreed Order
Mahmood and Bonnie Mohammed Page 2 of 4
10. The Court is requested to enter the proposed Order attached hereto.
11. The undersigned attorneys each hereby warrant to the other attorneys, and to the
parties, and to the Court, that he/she has reviewed this Settlement Stipulation with hislher client
or clients and that he/she has specifically been authorized to enter into this Settlement Stipulation
by hislher client or clients.
Respectfully Submitted,
PETITIONER, MAHMOOD and BONNIE MOHAMMED
Date: 1 ((r[ 61{
By: Ot tr~
HubertX. Gilroy, r quire
BROUJOS & GILROY, P.C.
4 North Hanover Street
Carlisle, P A 17013
(717) 243-4574
RESPONDENT,
CUMBERLAND COUNTY BOARD OF
ASSESSMENT APPEALS and COUNTY
OF CUMBERLAl'IID
Date: ?'io~
~/
By: vr--& ":::Z \
St phen . Tiley, Esquire ~
Assistant Cumberland County Solicitor
5 South Hanovt~r Street
Carlisle, PA 17013
(717) 243-5838
Supreme Court LD. 32318
Stipulation and Joint Motion for Agreed Order
Mahmood and Bonnie Mohammed Page 3 of 4
Date: J - 'tJ -O-J.-
Date:
l t> \ Ll-lCr\
Stipulation and Joint Motion for Agreed Order
RESPONDENT CARLISLE AREA
SCHOOL DISTRICT
s D. Flower, Jr., Esquire ~/
DIS, SHUFF, FLOWER & LINDSAY
26 West High Street
Carlisle, PA 17013
(717) 243-62322
RESPONDENT, NORTH MIDDLETON
TOWNSHIP
B ~~l. a
~, sq ire
ATTORNEY A LA
1 West Main Street
Shiremanstown, PA 17011
Mahmood and Bonnie Mohammed Page 4 of 4