I think I'm throwing in the towel - house reappraisal
OhioGuy
for tax purposes. So many houses are vacant that our city has jacked up
the values for those of us who are actually paying taxes to try to make
up the difference.
The thing is, the city simply used a sample of similar properties
that people overpaid for to determine the values of OUR properties.
They farmed this out to a third party company which simply drove by and
took a picture of the outside of our house, then used a computer program
to determine that the true value of our house should be 45% higher than
the price we paid for it 5 years ago.
This is despite the fact that average sale prices for our zip have
DECLINED 19.4% over the past year. (according to trulia.com, July-Sept
2007 vs July-Sept 2008) So somehow they are saying the value went up
enough over the past 4 years to still be up 45% after a 19.4% drop this
year. That's amazing - considering that Ohio never had a housing
bubble, and houses have been fairly stable.
Granted, we didn't overpay for our place. We got it at fair market
value, and paid the asking price of $46,000 for our 2,500 square foot
duplex. (6 bedrooms, 2 bathrooms) It sounds low compared to many parts
of the country, but it LOOKED bad. It had water damage to the drywall,
and lots of things needed painted and spackled, but everything was
structurally solid.
Anyway, guess who is hearing my complaint? Yes, it is the third
party company who the city farmed the appraisal out to. I'm SURE they
will be quite fair and unbiased in hearing me.
Of course, I've looked at the taxes being paid by many of my
neighbors, as well as the prices paid for their homes. Most of them
evidently either overpaid, or are paying higher taxes than I am.
Evidently they never successfully complained about the taxes when given
the opportunity.
My chances look pretty bleak. When I saw duplex after duplex in the
area with even higher taxes than ours, and sales prices higher than
ours, I began doubting whether I'd be able to make any traction to my
argument. I also decided not to spend the $600 on having a new
appraisal done, since it looked like it would probably just be money
down the drain.
The only thing I can really argue at this point is that the sales
prices of other homes in the area are rather general and meaningless
when compared to the actual sales price of THIS property back in October
2003. I can argue that the current appraisal value of THIS property
should be based on the SALES PRICE of THIS property, adjusted for
inflation and the current housing market.
Think I'll get anywhere with that one tomorrow?
Sure, I do have 3 or 4 similar duplexes I've found in the area that
sold for between $25K and $45K in the past 5 years. However, all I can
do with that is highlight how they simply jacked the appraised values up
a lot on those properties as well.
Anyone have any suggestions for me to try tomorrow?
Gordon
> I've got a meeting tomorrow about the 2008 reappraisal of our house
> for tax purposes. So many houses are vacant that our city has jacked
> up the values for those of us who are actually paying taxes to try to
> make up the difference.
>
> The thing is, the city simply used a sample of similar properties
> that people overpaid for to determine the values of OUR properties.
> They farmed this out to a third party company which simply drove by
> and took a picture of the outside of our house, then used a computer
> program to determine that the true value of our house should be 45%
> higher than the price we paid for it 5 years ago.
>
>
> Anyone have any suggestions for me to try tomorrow?
>
What data are you bringing to the meeting to support your
position? Did you get a realtor or title company to run
you a list of recent sales of simular properties in your
area??
Lou
"OhioGuy" <no...@none.net> wrote in message news:gdlm40$4ns$1...@aioe.org...
> I've got a meeting tomorrow about the 2008 reappraisal of our house
> for tax purposes. So many houses are vacant that our city has jacked up
> the values for those of us who are actually paying taxes to try to make
> up the difference.
> The only thing I can really argue at this point is that the sales
> prices of other homes in the area are rather general and meaningless
> when compared to the actual sales price of THIS property back in October
> 2003. I can argue that the current appraisal value of THIS property
> should be based on the SALES PRICE of THIS property, adjusted for
> inflation and the current housing market.
>
> Think I'll get anywhere with that one tomorrow?
I don't have anything worthwhile to suggest. However, I'll note that what
you paid for the place in 2003 is irrelevant, as is the recent drop in
average sales price from last year in your zip code - if what they're
supposed to be doing is appraising at today's market, what counts is what
the place would sell for today. From what you've said, "they" could just as
reasonably argue that you've been under-assessed for the last five years.
Jeff
> I've got a meeting tomorrow about the 2008 reappraisal of our house
> for tax purposes. So many houses are vacant that our city has jacked up
> the values for those of us who are actually paying taxes to try to make
> up the difference.
>
There's a butt load of online appraisals that will give you actual
sales and comps in your neighborhood. realtor.com and zillow.com to name
just two. There's a better one, but I don't have it bookmarked.
I'm still settling my Mom's estate in Ohio. My brother and myself
wanted to buy out my sister who just wants the money from the sale (Dad
built the house). Well, even though she had done an estimate recently
she hired an appraiser who went in and calculated everything that could
be done to raise the selling price. The net result? The house went down 20K.
Jeff
The Real Bev
> OhioGuy wrote:
>> I've got a meeting tomorrow about the 2008 reappraisal of our house
>> for tax purposes. So many houses are vacant that our city has jacked up
>> the values for those of us who are actually paying taxes to try to make
>> up the difference.
The feds insist on the value at time of death OR 6 months after. My
mom's condo eventually sold for considerably less. We had official ($250
each) appraisals done, which was probably stupid. You just don't get
any personal experience at this stuff and the lawyers and accountants
look at you the way vultures look at desert hikers.
> There's a butt load of online appraisals that will give you actual
> sales and comps in your neighborhood. realtor.com and zillow.com to name
> just two. There's a better one, but I don't have it bookmarked.
Zillow, in the case of my house, doesn't know shit. They think it's
worth $400K, but I know it would be worth that only if the house were
bulldozed and a bigger one built in its place.
--
Cheers, Bev
=======================================================
...so few snipers, so many politicians...
Bob F
I think it is generally refered to as an assessment rather than an appraisal.
What I did was to call the assessors office and have them send me what they
consider "comps". Then I searched the counties database for recent sales near
Jan 1 of this year, which is the time the assessment is for. I found a few
properties which were as similar as I could find to my house and lot, then
looked at them and noted how they were better than mine, and how mine was
obviously worth less (old kitchen and bath, fir floors instead of hardwood, no
view, etc), and proposed a value for mine based on those values. I got
significant reductions for both my house and my rental.
phil scott
be glad you are in a low cost housing area. here in the SF bay area
your house would probably we worth at least 250k.. maybe 500k, and you
would have lost100k on it in the last year... and your ppty tax would
be 5,000 or more a year.
it will get worse fast.... govt bloat, combined with work being sent
to china has decimated the working class and that tax base... the only
thing cities can do is go after those it has over a barrel... home
owners... they can make you pay or go live under a bridge.... as they
pay their police 150k a year in retirement (40% of some city's
budgets, plus another 30 or 40% for the current wages...includes
police and fire)
this load of crap wont float much longer..... if i were in your
situation I might picket city hall wiith notice that Im selling and
moving out of the county....poooof, one more tax payer and person
doing business in the town, gone.
Phil scott
Phil scott
phil scott
> "OhioGuy" <n...@none.net> wrote in messagenews:gdlm40$4ns$1...@aioe.org...
>
> - Show quoted text -
on the view issue.... in New hampshire starting a couple of years ago
is the 'view tax factor'... one guys taxes went from $500 a year to
$3500.. because he had a killer view... so he got a 'view assessement
factor of 7'
that is 7x the assessment if it had no view.
this mess wont stop until bloated govt has eaten the tax payers alive
and the tax base collapses entirely.... meantime cops are retiring at
100,000 to 1150,000 a year or more...
Phil scott
Rod Speed
Bet that would have the city hall suits pouring from their windows like lemmings as soon as they saw the notice.
webs...@cox.net
When I first heard about that, I thought that it wasn't unreasonable,
since the "view" is usually a selling point, and increases the value
of the property.
Later I realized: Wait a minute. If the view increases the value of
the property, that's already included in the property value!!!
Let the trees grow, and kill the view, I guess.
OhioGuy
yesterday's meeting.
I showed up at approx 3:35 in the afternoon for my 3:45 appointment.
I finally got to see the appraisal specialist at about 4:25.
I had found 4 duplexes within 3 to 4 blocks of OUR duplex, all of
which had sold in the past 6 months. 3 sold between $30k and $40k,
while the fourth sold for $50k. I took pictures of the exterior of all
of them to show they were in similar condition to our property.
Then I also showed him interior pictures of some issues at our
property that I believed negatively impacted the value.
We bought our current property 5 years ago for $46k. Currently they
value it at ~$51,700 for tax purposes. It was going to go up to $67,860.
After talking to them yesterday, they agreed that the new appraised
value would only go up to $54,000 - not $67,860! Yay!
So this means that instead of going up 31%, my appraised value should
only go up 4.5% instead, and it means my taxes will stay very
reasonable. I should end up saving about $330 a year.
Of course, that is only if they don't end up raising the tax rate
itself! In any case, I'm a pretty happy guy right now!
Rod Speed
> I thought I'd follow up by letting you all know the results of
> yesterday's meeting.
>
> I showed up at approx 3:35 in the afternoon for my 3:45 appointment.
> I finally got to see the appraisal specialist at about 4:25.
>
> I had found 4 duplexes within 3 to 4 blocks of OUR duplex, all of
> which had sold in the past 6 months. 3 sold between $30k and $40k,
> while the fourth sold for $50k. I took pictures of the exterior of
> all of them to show they were in similar condition to our property.
>
> Then I also showed him interior pictures of some issues at our
> property that I believed negatively impacted the value.
>
> We bought our current property 5 years ago for $46k. Currently they
> value it at ~$51,700 for tax purposes. It was going to go up to
> $67,860.
> After talking to them yesterday, they agreed that the new appraised
> value would only go up to $54,000 - not $67,860! Yay!
Fark, I'd apply a baseball bat to them and get it much lower than that myself,
if your place is comparable to the 3 that sold between $30K and $40K.
max
that is awesome. Rarely is there a happy ending to property tax
resolution cases around here (western burbs of chicago). Score one for
you!
.max
--
This signature can be appended to your outgoing mesages. Many people include in
their signatures contact information, and perhaps a joke or quotation.
Chris
Good for you! Sorry I didn't see your post before, but you did what I
did for my property tax hike. Took pictures, pointed at comparable homes
,also gave them an idea of how many homes were empty (unsold) and for
how long in my immediate neighborhood.
In my case they did not jack up the value at all, quite a change from an
almost 40% increase they had suggested.
The sad reality is that counties are strapped for money. The feds are
letting much less income tax trickle down and the cost to provide
services (roads, school, etc) is going up. However homeowners are not
much better. Something has to give.
Bob F
"phil scott" <ph...@philscott.net> wrote in message
news:925bb396-c08c-4751...@d10g2000pra.googlegroups.com...
on the view issue.... in New hampshire starting a couple of years ago
is the 'view tax factor'... one guys taxes went from $500 a year to
$3500.. because he had a killer view... so he got a 'view assessement
factor of 7'
that is 7x the assessment if it had no view.
this mess wont stop until bloated govt has eaten the tax payers alive
and the tax base collapses entirely.... meantime cops are retiring at
100,000 to 1150,000 a year or more...
Cops retiring on 1150,000 per year? Where?
If the assessor says it's woth 7 times as much, they'd better be able to show
you the comp sales.
phil scott
> "phil scott" <p...@philscott.net> wrote in message
>
> news:925bb396-c08c-4751...@d10g2000pra.googlegroups.com...
>
> on the view issue.... in New hampshire starting a couple of years ago
> is the 'view tax factor'... one guys taxes went from $500 a year to
> $3500.. because he had a killer view... so he got a 'view assessement
> factor of 7'
>
> that is 7x the assessment if it had no view.
>
> this mess wont stop until bloated govt has eaten the tax payers alive
> and the tax base collapses entirely.... meantime cops are retiring at
> 100,000 to 1150,000 a year or more...
>
> Cops retiring on 1150,000 per year? Where?
thats $150,000 a year iin some but not all cases... some higher, some
lower. Many in the $120,000 year range... from a base retirement of
about 80 or 90,000. it gets pumped up by means of a practice called
'spiking' thats because since approx the year 2000 retirement is based
on the last years pay... so other officers take sick time off, so the
last year guys get to work double or triple time hours in their last
year, running that income up dramatically, then they retire at 90% of
that in california...in New York City its 100%.. this has been
reported in the SF Chronicle, LA times, and Marin County Journal that
I am aware of... the unions involved do their best to stifle any
reports on this matter...so you you dont see much about it. It was
also covered in the Vallejo city bankrupcy this year. (80% of city
budget went to police and fire, about half of that to pay retirement
obligations for police and fire).
the numbers vary but thats the general picture.. The SF chronicle
story named several of the employees involved, a green card hospital
security guard retiring at 158,000 a year (done by working 16 hours a
day in his last year and saving sick days etc)...and a woman who
retired from city hall staff at age 76... with close to $180,000 a
year.
Not much of this was true prior to 2000... these are recent union
contracts. Ive talked to several retired police about this.. many
getting 40 to 60k a year... retired prior to 2000. they say they are
worried about the back lash and are not impressed either, they know it
wont fly for long... it cant.
Phil scott
phil scott
> "phil scott" <p...@philscott.net> wrote in message
Comparable sales make sense for sure, that report was from 3 or 4
years ago... the law would have been tested
by now, searching google for 'New Hampshire, view tax factor' should
get some data on it. I'll look it up later.
Phil scott
phil scott
> "phil scott" <p...@philscott.net> wrote in message
here is a link on the New hampshire view tax...there are a few hundred
articles..the citizens are outraged.
http://www.breitbart.com/article.php?id=D8DJADN01&show_article=1
phil scott
> "phil scott" <p...@philscott.net> wrote in message
One other thing... clearly i can see that both of these issues are
beyond belief for you...as they were for me as well.... complete
criminal insanity is not fathomable by reasonable people...especially
those brought up when such crime was not as completely rampant as it
is today.
what we will see next from out govt, state, local and federal,
primarily federal will be even futher beyond belief...completely
stunning in fact, such as giving 70 billion of the 700 billion fake
bail out directly to the criminals that caused the problem, to remain
in their positions, recieving bonuses. into the hundreds of millions
each firm! then ruthless attempts to collect taxes from the
starving middle class, ruining them and those businesses utterly.
it will get nasty as hell with govt bloat rampant and having run up a
100 trillion dollar debt, it cant stop taxing... but will be forced
to stop spending as the tax base collapses and it will be no use
printing more funny money.
... when govt spending is curtailed the already collapsing consumer
spending will come to a diasterous crawl.
None of that is rocket science. see my other posts for a list of
the driving factors... those done reverse at this stage.
Phil scott