01._Property_Tax_Appeal_Petition_Form_Valuation_Poverty_Classification.e1dd906e-1bdb-42a7-a882-cfcff12754f2.pdf
Shah H Shafi Petitioner V City Of Troy Respondent · 26-000418-TT
Text extracted from the reviewed PDF, organized by page. OCR and reading order may contain errors; confirm details in the PDF below.
Page 1
STATE OF MICHIGAN GRETCHEN WHITMER GOVERNOR DEPARTMENT OF LICENSING AND REGULATORY AFFAIRS LANSING ORLENE HAWKS DIRECTOR PROPERTY TAX APPEAL PETITION FORM VALUATION / EXEMPTION / CLASSIFICATION APPEAL MOAHR DOCKET NO. Do not use this form to appeal Principal Residence Exemption, Qualified Agricultural Exemption, Special Assessment, or Non-Property tax disputes. Pursuant to Michigan Tax Tribunal Rule (TTR) 277(3), you MUST submit a copy of the notice giving rise to the appeal (e.g. Board of Review Decision or Notice of Uncapping) with this Small Claims Petition, if applicable. If you do not submit this document, you may be held in default. Section 1: Petitioner’s Contact Information Filer Type: Individual First Name Shah M.I. H Last Name/Company Name Shafi Mailing Address (No., Street, P.O. Box or Rural Route) 6227 Malvern Dr City or Town Troy State Michigan ZIP Code 48098 Telephone Number 989-980-7568 Fax Number E-mail Address shah.shafi@hotmail.com Section 2: Petitioner’s Attorney/Authorized Representative’s Contact Information First Name M.I. Last Name Firm Name (if any) Address (No., Street, P.O. Box or Rural Route) City or Town State Michigan ZIP Code Telephone Number Fax Number E-mail Address Section 3: Subject Property Information How many parcels are you appealing? 1 If you are appealing more than one parcel, are they contiguous or adjoining? *If no, you must file separate appeals for each non-contiguous or non-adjoining parcel. Property Address (No., Street, City, ST, ZIP) [If multiple, list first property’s address] 6227 Malvern Dr
Page 2
STATE OF MICHIGAN GRETCHEN WHITMER GOVERNOR DEPARTMENT OF LICENSING AND REGULATORY AFFAIRS LANSING ORLENE HAWKS DIRECTOR Troy Michigan 48098 Taxing Authority (City or Township) Township Of Troy (NEWAYGO) County Oakland Section 4: Issues Being Appealed (check all that apply) True Cash and Taxable Value Section 5: Explain the Reason for this Appeal I, Shah Shafi (Petitioner), appeal the assessed and taxable value of the subject property on the grounds that the assessment significantly exceeds the property’s true cash value (TCV) as of December 31, 2025, and violates the constitutional requirement of uniformity as well as established Michigan assessment principles. Specifically: 1) Excessive and Unsupported Economic Condition Factor (ECF): The Assessor applied an ECF of approximately 1.66+, which is materially higher than market-supported ECF ranges for comparable properties in the same and surrounding markets. Market data, including sales within the subject subdivision and nearby comparable areas, indicate typical ECF values closer to ~0.80–1.10. The applied ECF is an outlier and results in a substantial overvaluation of the improvements. 2) Improper and Non-Comparable Sales Selection: The assessment relies on sales that are not comparable in terms of location, lot characteristics, home quality, and/or size. Certain sales appear to be from superior submarkets or include significantly larger acreage, higher-end construction, or premium features not present in the subject property. Meanwhile, more relevant and proximate comparable sales—including those within the same subdivision—were not appropriately considered. 3) Incorrect Property Classification and Cost Inputs: The subject property appears to have been classified at a higher construction grade (e.g., A-10 or equivalent) than warranted. Actual construction quality, materials, and finishes align more closely with a lower grade (e.g., B or B+), as supported by the Michigan Assessor’s Manual. Additionally, the Assessor’s estimated replacement cost materially exceeds the actual construction cost, further inflating value. 4) Overstated Land Value Without Consideration of External Obsolescence: The land value does not adequately reflect negative external influences affecting the subject property, including proximity to a major roadway, nearby highway access points, MDOT carpool lot and adjacent non-residential uses. These factors materially impact market desirability and should be reflected in land valuation. 5) Lack of Uniformity with Comparable Properties: The assessment is not uniform with similarly situated properties, including homes within the same subdivision and nearby neighborhoods. Comparable properties with similar or superior characteristics are assessed at materially lower levels, indicating unequal treatment in violation of Michigan’s uniformity requirement. 6) Board of Review Adjustment Still Excessive: While the March 2026 Board of Review reduced the assessed value (from approximately $3.1M to $2.8M), the revised value remains significantly above market- supported levels and does not address the fundamental valuation errors outlined above. For the reasons stated above, the Petitioner respectfully requests that the Michigan Tax Tribunal revise the assessed and taxable value of the property to reflect its true cash value as of December 31, 2025, consistent with market evidence, accepted appraisal practices, and the Michigan Constitution’s requirement of uniformity. The current assessment reflects a systematic overvaluation driven by inflated assumptions rather than observable market behavior. The requested revision aligns the property with real-world transactions, not theoretical constructs. Section 6: Jurisdictional Issues Year(s) you are appealing: 2026 Did you protest the assessment at a Board of Review (BOR)? Yes If Yes, check which BOR you attended AND upload the BOR decision: March
Page 3
STATE OF MICHIGAN GRETCHEN WHITMER GOVERNOR DEPARTMENT OF LICENSING AND REGULATORY AFFAIRS LANSING ORLENE HAWKS DIRECTOR If No, check the applicable reason(s): Did you request a Poverty Exemption at the BOR? If Yes, check which BOR considered your application AND upload the BOR decision: March July December If No, explain why: Section 7: Valuation Information *Use the multiple parcel form for additional, contiguous parcels. Parcel Identification Number: 88-20-06-351-006 Classification of Property: Personal Residential Current Assessed Value (also known as State Equalized Value) as established by the BOR: 1400000 Current Taxable Value as established by the BOR: 1400000 What do you believe is the fair market value (also known as True Cash Value)? 1550000 Multiply the True Cash Value by .5 and enter here. This is your contention of Assessed Value (also known as State Equalized Value). 775000 If you believe the Taxable Value differs from your contention of Assessed Value, enter your contention of Taxable Value. Section 8: Classification Information *Only the MI Dep’t of Treasury may appeal this issue to the Tribunal* Parcel Identification Number: Current Classification of Property as established by Board of Review: What do you believe is the property’s classification? If improved property, how is the property currently being used? If improved property, for what use was the property designed?
Page 4
STATE OF MICHIGAN GRETCHEN WHITMER GOVERNOR DEPARTMENT OF LICENSING AND REGULATORY AFFAIRS LANSING ORLENE HAWKS DIRECTOR Fee Information Electronic Signature *Typing your name below will serve as your signature Petitioner or Attorney/Authorized Representative’s Signature: /s/ Shah H Shafi Does the subject property have a Principal Residence Exemption of at least 50% as of the date of the filing of this petition? Yes Are you appealing ONLY the denial of a Poverty Exemption? No If you answered yes to either or both of these questions, you are not required to pay any filing fees. The filing fee is based on the greater of the State Equalized Value or Taxable Value in contention. If you are appealing more than one parcel, the parcel with the highest State Equalized Value or Taxable Value in contention will be used to determine your filing fee, plus $25.00 will be added for each additional parcel being appealed, not to exceed a total filing fee of $1,000. If your property is residential property (see MCL 205.762) and the State Equalized Value or Taxable Value in contention is: Filing Fee is: $100,000.00 and under $125.00 $100,000.01 to $500,000.00 $200.00 $Over $500,000.00 $300.00 If your property is NOT residential property (see MCL 205.762) and the State Equalized Value or Taxable Value in contention is: Filing Fee is: $100,000.00 and under $250.00 * Plus $25.00 for each additional parcel, as indicated above. If your property is NOT residential property and the State Equalized Value or Taxable Value in contention is $100,000.01 or greater the appeal does not qualify for Small Claims. Therefore, an Entire Tribunal petition must be filed.