Richard F Ban, Petitioner V City Of Detroit, Respondent

Page 1

STATE OF MICHIGAN

 

GRETCHEN WHITMER 

GOVERNOR 

DEPARTMENT OF LICENSING AND REGULATORY AFFAIRS 

LANSING

MARLON I. BROWN, DPA 

DIRECTOR 

 

 

MICHIGAN TAX TRIBUNAL · 611 W. OTTAWA ST., LANSING, MI 48933 · 517-335-9760 

PO BOX 30232, LANSING, MI 48909 · Other Carriers: 2407 N. GRAND RIVER AVE., LANSING, MI 48906 

Richard F Ban, 

MICHIGAN TAX TRIBUNAL 

 

Petitioner, 

SMALL CLAIMS DIVISION 

 

v 

 

MTT Docket No. 25-003549 

 

City of Detroit, 

 

Presiding Judge 

Respondent. 

 

Patricia L. Halm 

 

ORDER OF DISMISSAL 

 

The Tribunal has considered the file in this case and finds that Petitioner was placed in 

default on October 20, 2025. On November 19, 2025, the Tribunal extended the time 

for Petitioner to cure the default by an additional 14 days, and Petitioner failed to 

respond to either order. Petitioner has not complied with either order, and the latter 

stated that “failure to comply with this Order may result in the dismissal of the case” and 

referenced Grimm v Dep’t of Treasury.1 In Grimm, the Michigan Court of Appeals 

summarized factors that the Tribunal should consider before imposing the sanction of 

dismissal. Those factors are: 

 

(1) whether the violation was wilful or accidental; (2) the party's history of 

refusing to comply with previous court orders; (3) the prejudice to the 

opposing party; (4) whether there exists a history of deliberate delay; (5) the 

degree of compliance with other parts of the court's orders; (6) attempts to 

cure the defect; and (7) whether a lesser sanction would better serve the 

interests of justice.2 

 

Here, Petitioner’s failure to comply with multiple orders has established a history of 

deliberate delay. As a result, giving careful consideration to the factors involved and 

considering all options in determining what sanction is just and proper, the Tribunal 

finds that dismissal is appropriate, and a lesser sanction would not be appropriate in 

light of Petitioner’s history of noncompliance in this case. 

 

Therefore, 

 

IT IS ORDERED that this case is DISMISSED. 

 

This order resolves all pending claims in this matter and closes this case. 

 

 

 

1 Grimm v Dep’t of Treasury, 291 Mich App 140 (2010). 

2 Id. at 149.

Page 2

MTT Docket No. 25-003549 

Page 2 of 2 

 

APPEAL RIGHTS 

If you disagree with the final decision in this case, you may file a motion for 

reconsideration with the Tribunal or a claim of appeal with the Michigan Court of 

Appeals. 

 

A motion for reconsideration must be filed with the Tribunal with the required filing fee 

within 21 days from the date of entry of the final decision. Because the final decision 

closes the case, the motion cannot be filed through the Tribunal’s web-based e-filing 

system; it must be filed by mail or personal service. The fee for the filing of such 

motions is $50.00 in the Entire Tribunal and $25.00 in the Small Claims Division, unless 

the Small Claims decision relates to the valuation of property and the property had a 

principal residence exemption of at least 50% at the time the petition was filed or the 

decision relates to the grant or denial of a poverty or disabled veterans exemption and, 

if so, there is no filing fee. You are required to serve a copy of the motion on the 

opposing party by mail or personal service or by email if the opposing party agrees to 

electronic service, and proof demonstrating that service must be submitted with the 

motion. Responses to motions for reconsideration are prohibited and there are no oral 

arguments unless otherwise ordered by the Tribunal. 

 

Alternatively, you may file a claim of appeal with the Michigan Court of Appeals. If the 

claim is filed within 21 days of the entry of the final decision, it is an “appeal of right.” If 

the claim is filed more than 21 days after the entry of the final decision, it is an “appeal 

by leave.” A copy of the claim of appeal must be filed with the Tribunal to certify the 

record on appeal. There is no certification fee. 

 

 

Entered: December 16, 2025 

 

 

By _____________________________ 

sw/sb 

 

 

PROOF OF SERVICE 

 

I certify that a copy of the foregoing was sent on the entry date indicated above to the 

parties or their attorneys or authorized representatives, if any, utilizing either the mailing 

or email addresses on file, as provided by those parties, attorneys, or authorized 

representatives. 

 

By: Tribunal Clerk

These are text excerpts, not the complete document. Text recognition and reading order can contain errors. Check the PDF for complete wording, formatting, and context.

Page 1

STATE OF MICHIGAN

 

GRETCHEN WHITMER 

GOVERNOR 

DEPARTMENT OF LICENSING AND REGULATORY AFFAIRS 

LANSING

MARLON I. BROWN, DPA 

DIRECTOR 

 

 

MICHIGAN TAX TRIBUNAL · 611 W. OTTAWA ST., LANSING, MI 48933 · 517-335-9760 

PO BOX 30232, LANSING, MI 48909 · Other Carriers: 2407 N. GRAND RIVER AVE., LANSING, MI 48906 

Richard F Ban, 

MICHIGAN TAX TRIBUNAL 

 

Petitioner, 

SMALL CLAIMS DIVISION 

 

v 

 

MTT Docket No. 25-003549 

 

City of Detroit, 

 

Presiding Judge 

Respondent. 

 

Patricia L. Halm 

 

ORDER EXTENDING TIME FOR PETITIONER TO CURE DEFAULT 

 

ORDER HOLDING RESPONDENT IN DEFAULT 

 

The Tribunal has considered the file in this case and finds that it entered an order 

holding Petitioner in default on October 20, 2025, because the petition identified 

Petitioner was attempting to appeal both the subject property’s true cash and taxable 

value and the denial of a poverty exemption but failed to include a copy of the notice 

denying the request for a poverty exemption.1 Petitioner was required to cure the 

default by either submitting the notice denying the request for a poverty exemption, or 

by submitting a response indicating that this case should go forward as a true cash and 

taxable value appeal only, within 14 days. Petitioner has had ample time to comply, yet 

has failed to respond or submit the required filings. Though the Tribunal finds an 

extension of time to cure the default appropriate, Petitioner’s failure to comply with 

Tribunal orders and its Rules of Practice and Procedure has established a history of 

deliberate delay that would justify dismissal of the case for failure to timely comply with 

this order.2 

 

Further, the Tribunal finds Respondent has failed to file an answer.3 Respondent must 

file an answer within 14 days of the entry of this order. Small Claims answer forms can 

be found on our website at www.michigan.gov/taxtrib. Therefore, 

 

IT IS ORDERED that the time for Petitioner to cure the default is EXTENDED. 

 

IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that Petitioner must complete the following to cure the 

default: (1) file either the notice denying the request for a poverty exemption, or submit 

a response indicating that this case should go forward as a true cash and taxable value 

appeal only, (2) file a Motion to Set Aside Default, and (3) file proof the motion was 

served on Respondent. The foregoing must be filed with the Tribunal within 14 days of 

 

1 The order further stated, “Failure to comply with this order will result in the defaulted party being 

required to file a motion to set aside the default (with appropriate filing fee).” 

2 See Grimm v Dep’t of Treasury, 291 Mich App 140 (2010). 

3 TTR 281.

Page 2

MTT Docket No. 25-003549 

Page 2 of 2 

 

the entry of this order.4 

 

Failure to comply with this order may result in the dismissal of the case, as provided by 

TTR 237. 

 

IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that Respondent is held in DEFAULT. 

 

IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that Respondent must complete the following to cure the 

default: file an answer. The foregoing must be filed with the Tribunal within 14 days of 

the entry of this order. 

 

Failure to comply with this order will result in Respondent being required to file a motion 

to set aside the default. 

 

 

 

Entered: November 19, 2025 

 

 

By _____________________________ 

kac 

 

PROOF OF SERVICE 

 

I certify that a copy of the foregoing was sent on the entry date indicated above to the 

parties or their attorneys or authorized representatives, if any, utilizing either the mailing 

or email addresses on file, as provided by those parties, attorneys, or authorized 

representatives. 

 

By: Tribunal Clerk 

 

 

 

 

4 “A submission by mail is considered filed on the date indicated by the United States Postal Service 

postmark on the envelope containing the submission. A submission without a postmark or with an illegible 

postmark is considered filed on the date the submission is received by the tribunal. A submission by 

commercial delivery service is considered filed on the date the submission is given to the commercial 

service for delivery to the tribunal as indicated by the receipt date on the package containing the 

submission. A submission by personal service is considered filed on the date the submission is received. 

A submission through the tribunal’s e-filing system by 11:59 p.m. on a business day is considered filed on 

that business day. A submission by email to the email address designated by the tribunal by 11:59 p.m. 

on a business day is considered filed on that business day. A submission on a Saturday, a Sunday, or a 

holiday is considered filed on the following business day, as provided by section 35a of the tax tribunal 

act, MCL 205.735a.” TTR 225(5).

These are text excerpts, not the complete document. Text recognition and reading order can contain errors. Check the PDF for complete wording, formatting, and context.

Page 1

STATE OF MICHIGAN

 

GRETCHEN WHITMER 

GOVERNOR 

DEPARTMENT OF LICENSING AND REGULATORY AFFAIRS 

LANSING

MARLON I. BROWN, DPA 

DIRECTOR 

 

 

MICHIGAN TAX TRIBUNAL · 611 W. OTTAWA ST., LANSING, MI 48933 · 517-335-9760 

PO BOX 30232, LANSING, MI 48909 · Other Carriers: 2407 N. GRAND RIVER AVE., LANSING, MI 48906 

Richard F Ban, 

MICHIGAN TAX TRIBUNAL 

 

Petitioner, 

SMALL CLAIMS DIVISION 

 

v 

 

MTT Docket No. 25-003549 

 

City of Detroit, 

 

Presiding Judge 

Respondent. 

 

Patricia L. Halm 

 

ORDER EXTENDING TIME FOR PETITIONER TO CURE DEFAULT 

 

ORDER HOLDING RESPONDENT IN DEFAULT 

 

The Tribunal has considered the file in this case and finds that it entered an order 

holding Petitioner in default on October 20, 2025, because the petition identified 

Petitioner was attempting to appeal both the subject property’s true cash and taxable 

value and the denial of a poverty exemption but failed to include a copy of the notice 

denying the request for a poverty exemption.1 Petitioner was required to cure the 

default by either submitting the notice denying the request for a poverty exemption, or 

by submitting a response indicating that this case should go forward as a true cash and 

taxable value appeal only, within 14 days. Petitioner has had ample time to comply, yet 

has failed to respond or submit the required filings. Though the Tribunal finds an 

extension of time to cure the default appropriate, Petitioner’s failure to comply with 

Tribunal orders and its Rules of Practice and Procedure has established a history of 

deliberate delay that would justify dismissal of the case for failure to timely comply with 

this order.2 

 

Further, the Tribunal finds Respondent has failed to file an answer.3 Respondent must 

file an answer within 14 days of the entry of this order. Small Claims answer forms can 

be found on our website at www.michigan.gov/taxtrib. Therefore, 

 

IT IS ORDERED that the time for Petitioner to cure the default is EXTENDED. 

 

IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that Petitioner must complete the following to cure the 

default: (1) file either the notice denying the request for a poverty exemption, or submit 

a response indicating that this case should go forward as a true cash and taxable value 

appeal only, (2) file a Motion to Set Aside Default, and (3) file proof the motion was 

served on Respondent. The foregoing must be filed with the Tribunal within 14 days of 

 

1 The order further stated, “Failure to comply with this order will result in the defaulted party being 

required to file a motion to set aside the default (with appropriate filing fee).” 

2 See Grimm v Dep’t of Treasury, 291 Mich App 140 (2010). 

3 TTR 281.

Page 2

MTT Docket No. 25-003549 

Page 2 of 2 

 

the entry of this order.4 

 

Failure to comply with this order may result in the dismissal of the case, as provided by 

TTR 237. 

 

IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that Respondent is held in DEFAULT. 

 

IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that Respondent must complete the following to cure the 

default: file an answer. The foregoing must be filed with the Tribunal within 14 days of 

the entry of this order. 

 

Failure to comply with this order will result in Respondent being required to file a motion 

to set aside the default. 

 

 

 

Entered: November 19, 2025 

 

 

By _____________________________ 

kac 

 

PROOF OF SERVICE 

 

I certify that a copy of the foregoing was sent on the entry date indicated above to the 

parties or their attorneys or authorized representatives, if any, utilizing either the mailing 

or email addresses on file, as provided by those parties, attorneys, or authorized 

representatives. 

 

By: Tribunal Clerk 

 

 

 

 

4 “A submission by mail is considered filed on the date indicated by the United States Postal Service 

postmark on the envelope containing the submission. A submission without a postmark or with an illegible 

postmark is considered filed on the date the submission is received by the tribunal. A submission by 

commercial delivery service is considered filed on the date the submission is given to the commercial 

service for delivery to the tribunal as indicated by the receipt date on the package containing the 

submission. A submission by personal service is considered filed on the date the submission is received. 

A submission through the tribunal’s e-filing system by 11:59 p.m. on a business day is considered filed on 

that business day. A submission by email to the email address designated by the tribunal by 11:59 p.m. 

on a business day is considered filed on that business day. A submission on a Saturday, a Sunday, or a 

holiday is considered filed on the following business day, as provided by section 35a of the tax tribunal 

act, MCL 205.735a.” TTR 225(5).

These are text excerpts, not the complete document. Text recognition and reading order can contain errors. Check the PDF for complete wording, formatting, and context.

Page 1

STATE OF MICHIGAN

 

GRETCHEN WHITMER 

GOVERNOR 

DEPARTMENT OF LICENSING AND REGULATORY AFFAIRS 

LANSING

MARLON I. BROWN, DPA 

DIRECTOR 

 

 

MICHIGAN TAX TRIBUNAL · 611 W. OTTAWA ST., LANSING, MI 48933 · 517-335-9760 

PO BOX 30232, LANSING, MI 48909 · Other Carriers: 2407 N. GRAND RIVER AVE., LANSING, MI 48906 

Richard F Ban, 

MICHIGAN TAX TRIBUNAL 

 

Petitioner, 

SMALL CLAIMS DIVISION 

 

v 

 

MTT Docket No. 25-003549 

 

City of Detroit, 

 

Presiding Judge 

Respondent. 

 

Patricia L. Halm 

 

ORDER HOLDING PETITIONER IN DEFAULT 

 

The Tribunal has reviewed the file in this case and finds that Petitioner filed a petition on 

July 31, 2025, identifying the issues being appealed as the subject property’s true cash 

and taxable value and the denial of a poverty exemption. Petitioner submitted a March 

Board of Review decision showing there was an adjustment granted to the assessed 

and taxable values. However, there is no evidence that Petitioner requested a poverty 

exemption or that a request was denied. 

 

Petitioner is attempting to appeal multiple issues in one case and has not provided a 

copy of the notice denying the 2025 poverty exemption. As such, Petitioner must either: 

(1) submit the missing notice denying the poverty exemption with a separate petition for 

this issue within 14 days of entry of this order. Small Claims petition forms and 

information on filing fees can be found on our website at www.michigan.gov/taxtrib, or 

(2) submit a response indicating that this case should go forward as a true cash and 

taxable value appeal only and the poverty exemption issue is not being appealed. 

Therefore, 

 

IT IS ORDERED that Petitioner is held in DEFAULT. 

 

IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that Petitioner must cure the default as indicated above. 

The foregoing must be filed with the Tribunal within 14 days of entry of this Order.1 

 

 

1 “A submission by mail is considered filed on the date indicated by the United States Postal Service 

postmark on the envelope containing the submission. A submission without a postmark or with an 

illegible postmark is considered filed on the date the submission is received by the tribunal. A submission 

by commercial delivery service is considered filed on the date the submission is given to the commercial 

service for delivery to the tribunal as indicated by the receipt date on the package containing the 

submission. A submission by personal service is considered filed on the date the submission is received. 

A submission through the tribunal’s e-filing system by 11:59 p.m. on a business day is considered filed on 

that business day. A submission by email to the email address designated by the tribunal by 11:59 p.m. 

on a business day is considered filed on that business day. A submission on a Saturday, a Sunday, or a 

holiday is considered filed on the following business day, as provided by section 35a of the tax tribunal 

act, MCL 205.735a.” TTR 225(5).

Page 2

MTT Docket No. 25-003549 

Page 2 of 2 

 

Failure to comply with this order will result in Petitioner being required to file a motion to 

set aside the default (with appropriate filing fee). 

 

IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that if Petitioner files a poverty exemption petition, the 

petition shall note the docket number assigned to this case by the Tribunal and if filed 

utilizing the Tribunal’s e-filing system, must be filed on the assigned docket number as 

an “Amended Petition.” The Tribunal will sever that petition into a separate docket 

number after receipt. 

 

 

Entered: October 20, 2025 

 

 

By _____________________________ 

sw/jcr 

 

PROOF OF SERVICE 

 

I certify that a copy of the foregoing was sent on the entry date indicated above to the 

parties or their attorneys or authorized representatives, if any, utilizing either the mailing 

or email addresses on file, as provided by those parties, attorneys, or authorized 

representatives. 

 

By: Tribunal Clerk

These are text excerpts, not the complete document. Text recognition and reading order can contain errors. Check the PDF for complete wording, formatting, and context.

Page 1

RECEIVED 

AUG 0 5 2025 

MICHIGAN TAX TRIBUNAL 

STATE OF MICHIGAN 

. 

GRETCHEN WHITMER 

DEPARTMENT OF LICENSING AND REGULATORY AFFAIRS 

MARLON | BROWN. DPA 

GOVERNOR 

LANSING 

PROPERTY TAX APPEAL PETITION FORM 

VALUATION / EXEMPTION / CLASSIFICATION APPEAL 

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) 279, 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 

First Name 

ML 

Last Name/Company Name 

Richard 

F 

Ban 

Mailing Address {No., Street, P.O. Box or Rural Route} 

1647 Balmoral Drive 

City or Town 

State 

ZiP Code 

Detroit 

Mi 

48203 

Telephone Number (313) 522-9771 

E-mail Address {do not enter unless you want MTT to send all correspondence via e-mail) 

riban1@gmail.com 

Section 2: Petitioner's Attorney/Authorized Representative’s Contact Information 

1} 

First Name 

M.L 

Last Name 

Firm Name (if any) 

Maifing Address (No., Street, P.O. Box or Rural Route) 

City or Town 

State 

ZIP Code 

Telephone Number 

Email Address (do not enter unless you want MTT to send all correspondence via email) 

Section 3: Subject Property Information 

How many 

If you are appealing more than one parcel, are they contiguous or adjoining? 

parcels are you | [7] yes* 

No 

appealing? 

*If yes, use a multiple parce! form for information regarding any contiguous parcels. 

*if no, you must file separate appeals for each non-contiguous or non-adjoining parcel or you will be defaulted. 

1 

Property Address (No., Street, Gily, ST, ZIP) {if multiple, list first property's address) 

1647 Balmoral Dr.

Page 2

STATE OF MICHIGAN 

GRETCHEN WHITMER 

DEPARTMENT OF LICENSING AND REGULATORY AFFAIRS 

MARLON I. BROWN, DPA 

GOVERNOR 

LANSING 

DIRECTOR 

Section 4: Issues Being Appealed (check ali that appiy) 

[4 True Cash and Taxable Value 

Poverty Exemption 

[1] Taxable Value Only (calculation) 

{1 Disabled Veterans Exemption 

[3 Uncapping of Taxable Value 

{1 Eligibte Manufacturing Personal Property (ESA) 

[7] Exemption from Taxation (other than the denial of a 

{1 Classification 

Principal Residence or Qualified Agricultural Exemption) 

Section 5: Explain the Reason for this Appeal 

The current assessment overstates the true cash value of the property. The home 

requires major improvements that reduce market value, including: -Roof replacement 

over $100,000 -Original steel casement windows that do not open (replacement $5000 

per window (x30 windows) -Lead water service line posing health concerns, -Extremely 

high utility costs due to age and inefficiency. A property two doors down also suffered a 

major fire in October 2024 and has remained vacant with overgrown grass and a 

construction fence for nearly a year, further depressing neighborhood values. Detroit 

has some of the highest property tax millages in the state, while schools underperform, 

police presence is limited, and residents often pay special assessments for private 

security. Rising assessments under these conditions force out long-term residents and 

weaken the neighborhood. For these reasons, the assessment is excessive. 

| request 

that the assessed and taxable values be reduced to reflect the property's actual 

condition and market value.*Note: Unclear on the poverty exemption. 

Section 6: Jurisdictional Issues 

Year(s) you are appealing: 

2025 

Did you protest the assessment at a Board of Review (BOR)? 

(#4 Yes 

[1 No 

1f Yes, check which BOR you attended AND attach the BOR decision: 

(¥ March 

[1 uly 

[1 December 

1 No, check the applicable reason(s): 

7] Not required to attend 

Assessment Change Notice was not received by Petitioner 

[H] Appealing a purported Clerical Error or Mutual Mistake of Fact (if yes, include explanation in Section 5) 

[7] Appealing within 35 days of State Tax Commission Order

Page 3

STATE OF MICHIGAN 

GRETCHEN WHITMER 

DEPARTMENT OF LICENSING AND REGULATORY AFFAIRS 

MARLON I. BROWN, DPA 

GOVERNOR 

LANSING 

Section 7: Valuation Information suse the muttiple parcel form for additionat, contiguous parcels. 

Parcel identification Number: 

27100118 

Classification of Property: 

Real 

Personal 

(check one) 

Agricultural 

Commercial 

industrial 

Residential 

Timber-Cutover 

Developmental 

Utility 

(check one) 

Current Assessed Value (also known as State Equalized Value) as established by the BOR: 

217,400 

Current Taxable Value as established by the BOR: 

\ \%0,¢4¢ 

What do you believe is the fair market value (also known ag 

Jrue Cash Value)? 

Last NOPAIS AL 

(ais 

250,000 

iY the True Cadh Value by .5 and ent®r here, This is your contention of Assessed Value. 

25,000 

If you believe the Taxable Value differs from your contention of Assessed Value, enter your contention of Taxable Value. 

TINUE 

pethg 

dy 

bo 

Laver 

Acs 

ydlues ise wy Cif 

Section 8: Classification Information only the Mi Dep't of Treasury may appeal this issue to the Tribunat* 

Parcel Identification Number: 

27100118 

Current Classification of Property as established by Board of Review: 

Real 

Personal 

{check one) 

A 

BY 

ns 

vo 

09 swum 

forsale festive 

Agricultural 

Commercial 

Industrial 

Residential 

Timber-Cutover 

Developmental 

Utility 

(check one) 

What do you believe is the property's classification? 

Real 

Personal 

(check one) 

Agricultural 

Commercial 

industrial 

Residential 

Timber-Cutover 

Developmental 

Utility 

(check one) 

Ifimproved property, how is the property currently being used? 

If improved property, for what use was the property designed? 

DIRECTOR 

¢ O-cray—

Page 4

STATE OF MICHIGAN 

GRETCHEN WHITMER 

DEPARTMENT OF LICENSING AND REGULATORY AFFAIRS 

MARLON 1. BROWN, DPA 

GOVERNOR 

LANSING 

DIRECTOR 

Fee Information 

Does the subject property have a Principal Residence Exemption of at least

Page 5

ror

Page 6

P

These are text excerpts, not the complete document. Text recognition and reading order can contain errors. Check the PDF for complete wording, formatting, and context.

Page 1

STATE OF MICHIGAN

GRETCHEN WHITMER

GOVERNOR

DEPARTMENT OF LICENSING AND REGULATORY AFFAIRS

LANSING

MARLON I. BROWN, DPA

DIRECTOR

MICHIGAN TAX TRIBUNAL · 611 W. OTTAWA ST., LANSING, MI 48933 · 517-335-9760

PO BOX 30232, LANSING, MI 48909 · Other Carriers: 2407 N. GRAND RIVER AVE., LANSING, MI 48906

Richard F Ban,

Petitioner,

MICHIGAN TAX TRIBUNAL

SMALL CLAIMS DIVISION

v 

MTT Docket No. 25-003549

City of Detroit,

Respondent.

NOTICE OF DOCKET NUMBER

TAKE NOTICE that a Small Claims petition has been filed and the above-noted docket 

number has been assigned to that petition. The assignment of the docket number does 

not mean that the Tribunal has authority over the petition or that the petition complies 

with the Tribunal’s rules. The docket number needs to be included on all documents 

submitted in this case.

Respondent shall file an answer to the petition within 28 days of the issuance of a 

copy of this Notice to Respondent. Tribunal answer forms are available on our 

website at www.michigan.gov/taxtrib. Respondents must utilize the appropriate answer 

form. Failure to file the answer within the 28-day time frame may result in the 

placement of Respondent in default, as provided by TTR 281. Further, an electronic 

copy of the petition can be reviewed by utilizing the Docket Lookup Search on the 

Tribunal’s website.

By: __Tribunal Clerk_____

Entered: October 7, 2025

PROOF OF SERVICE

I certify that a copy of the foregoing was sent on the entry date indicated above to the 

parties or their attorneys or authorized representatives, if any, utilizing either the mailing 

or email addresses on file, as provided by those parties, attorneys, or authorized 

representatives.

By: Tribunal Clerk

Page 2

STATE OF MICHIGAN

GRETCHEN WHITMER

GOVERNOR

DEPARTMENT OF LICENSING AND REGULATORY AFFAIRS

LANSING

MARLON I. BROWN, DPA

DIRECTOR

MICHIGAN TAX TRIBUNAL · 611 W. OTTAWA ST., LANSING, MI 48933 · 517-335-9760

PO BOX 30232, LANSING, MI 48909 · Other Carriers: 2407 N. GRAND RIVER AVE., LANSING, MI 48906

Richard F Ban,

Petitioner,

MICHIGAN TAX TRIBUNAL

SMALL CLAIMS DIVISION

v 

MTT Docket No. 25-003549

City of Detroit,

Respondent.

NOTICE OF DOCKET NUMBER

TAKE NOTICE that a Small Claims petition has been filed and the above-noted docket 

number has been assigned to that petition. The assignment of the docket number does 

not mean that the Tribunal has authority over the petition or that the petition complies 

with the Tribunal’s rules. The docket number needs to be included on all documents 

submitted in this case.

Respondent shall file an answer to the petition within 28 days of the issuance of a 

copy of this Notice to Respondent. Tribunal answer forms are available on our 

website at www.michigan.gov/taxtrib. Respondents must utilize the appropriate answer 

form. Failure to file the answer within the 28-day time frame may result in the 

placement of Respondent in default, as provided by TTR 281. Further, an electronic 

copy of the petition can be reviewed by utilizing the Docket Lookup Search on the 

Tribunal’s website.

By: __Tribunal Clerk_____

Entered: October 7, 2025

PROOF OF SERVICE

I certify that a copy of the foregoing was sent on the entry date indicated above to the 

parties or their attorneys or authorized representatives, if any, utilizing either the mailing 

or email addresses on file, as provided by those parties, attorneys, or authorized 

representatives.

By: Tribunal Clerk

These are text excerpts, not the complete document. Text recognition and reading order can contain errors. Check the PDF for complete wording, formatting, and context.

Page 1

RECEIVED 

AUG 0 5 2025 

MICHIGAN TAX TRIBUNAL 

STATE OF MICHIGAN 

. 

GRETCHEN WHITMER 

DEPARTMENT OF LICENSING AND REGULATORY AFFAIRS 

MARLON | BROWN. DPA 

GOVERNOR 

LANSING 

PROPERTY TAX APPEAL PETITION FORM 

VALUATION / EXEMPTION / CLASSIFICATION APPEAL 

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) 279, 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 

First Name 

ML 

Last Name/Company Name 

Richard 

F 

Ban 

Mailing Address {No., Street, P.O. Box or Rural Route} 

1647 Balmoral Drive 

City or Town 

State 

ZiP Code 

Detroit 

Mi 

48203 

Telephone Number (313) 522-9771 

E-mail Address {do not enter unless you want MTT to send all correspondence via e-mail) 

riban1@gmail.com 

Section 2: Petitioner's Attorney/Authorized Representative’s Contact Information 

1} 

First Name 

M.L 

Last Name 

Firm Name (if any) 

Maifing Address (No., Street, P.O. Box or Rural Route) 

City or Town 

State 

ZIP Code 

Telephone Number 

Email Address (do not enter unless you want MTT to send all correspondence via email) 

Section 3: Subject Property Information 

How many 

If you are appealing more than one parcel, are they contiguous or adjoining? 

parcels are you | [7] yes* 

No 

appealing? 

*If yes, use a multiple parce! form for information regarding any contiguous parcels. 

*if no, you must file separate appeals for each non-contiguous or non-adjoining parcel or you will be defaulted. 

1 

Property Address (No., Street, Gily, ST, ZIP) {if multiple, list first property's address) 

1647 Balmoral Dr.

Page 2

STATE OF MICHIGAN 

GRETCHEN WHITMER 

DEPARTMENT OF LICENSING AND REGULATORY AFFAIRS 

MARLON I. BROWN, DPA 

GOVERNOR 

LANSING 

DIRECTOR 

Section 4: Issues Being Appealed (check ali that appiy) 

[4 True Cash and Taxable Value 

Poverty Exemption 

[1] Taxable Value Only (calculation) 

{1 Disabled Veterans Exemption 

[3 Uncapping of Taxable Value 

{1 Eligibte Manufacturing Personal Property (ESA) 

[7] Exemption from Taxation (other than the denial of a 

{1 Classification 

Principal Residence or Qualified Agricultural Exemption) 

Section 5: Explain the Reason for this Appeal 

The current assessment overstates the true cash value of the property. The home 

requires major improvements that reduce market value, including: -Roof replacement 

over $100,000 -Original steel casement windows that do not open (replacement $5000 

per window (x30 windows) -Lead water service line posing health concerns, -Extremely 

high utility costs due to age and inefficiency. A property two doors down also suffered a 

major fire in October 2024 and has remained vacant with overgrown grass and a 

construction fence for nearly a year, further depressing neighborhood values. Detroit 

has some of the highest property tax millages in the state, while schools underperform, 

police presence is limited, and residents often pay special assessments for private 

security. Rising assessments under these conditions force out long-term residents and 

weaken the neighborhood. For these reasons, the assessment is excessive. 

| request 

that the assessed and taxable values be reduced to reflect the property's actual 

condition and market value.*Note: Unclear on the poverty exemption. 

Section 6: Jurisdictional Issues 

Year(s) you are appealing: 

2025 

Did you protest the assessment at a Board of Review (BOR)? 

(#4 Yes 

[1 No 

1f Yes, check which BOR you attended AND attach the BOR decision: 

(¥ March 

[1 uly 

[1 December 

1 No, check the applicable reason(s): 

7] Not required to attend 

Assessment Change Notice was not received by Petitioner 

[H] Appealing a purported Clerical Error or Mutual Mistake of Fact (if yes, include explanation in Section 5) 

[7] Appealing within 35 days of State Tax Commission Order

Page 3

STATE OF MICHIGAN 

GRETCHEN WHITMER 

DEPARTMENT OF LICENSING AND REGULATORY AFFAIRS 

MARLON I. BROWN, DPA 

GOVERNOR 

LANSING 

Section 7: Valuation Information suse the muttiple parcel form for additionat, contiguous parcels. 

Parcel identification Number: 

27100118 

Classification of Property: 

Real 

Personal 

(check one) 

Agricultural 

Commercial 

industrial 

Residential 

Timber-Cutover 

Developmental 

Utility 

(check one) 

Current Assessed Value (also known as State Equalized Value) as established by the BOR: 

217,400 

Current Taxable Value as established by the BOR: 

\ \%0,¢4¢ 

What do you believe is the fair market value (also known ag 

Jrue Cash Value)? 

Last NOPAIS AL 

(ais 

250,000 

iY the True Cadh Value by .5 and ent®r here, This is your contention of Assessed Value. 

25,000 

If you believe the Taxable Value differs from your contention of Assessed Value, enter your contention of Taxable Value. 

TINUE 

pethg 

dy 

bo 

Laver 

Acs 

ydlues ise wy Cif 

Section 8: Classification Information only the Mi Dep't of Treasury may appeal this issue to the Tribunat* 

Parcel Identification Number: 

27100118 

Current Classification of Property as established by Board of Review: 

Real 

Personal 

{check one) 

A 

BY 

ns 

vo 

09 swum 

forsale festive 

Agricultural 

Commercial 

Industrial 

Residential 

Timber-Cutover 

Developmental 

Utility 

(check one) 

What do you believe is the property's classification? 

Real 

Personal 

(check one) 

Agricultural 

Commercial 

industrial 

Residential 

Timber-Cutover 

Developmental 

Utility 

(check one) 

Ifimproved property, how is the property currently being used? 

If improved property, for what use was the property designed? 

DIRECTOR 

¢ O-cray—

Page 4

STATE OF MICHIGAN 

GRETCHEN WHITMER 

DEPARTMENT OF LICENSING AND REGULATORY AFFAIRS 

MARLON 1. BROWN, DPA 

GOVERNOR 

LANSING 

DIRECTOR 

Fee Information 

Does the subject property have a Principal Residence Exemption of at least

Page 5

ror

Page 6

P

These are text excerpts, not the complete document. Text recognition and reading order can contain errors. Check the PDF for complete wording, formatting, and context.