Shah H Shafi Petitioner V City Of Troy 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

Shah H Shafi,

Petitioner,

MICHIGAN TAX TRIBUNAL

SMALL CLAIMS DIVISION

v 

MTT Docket No. 26-000418

City Of Troy,

Respondent.

NOTICE OF FILING

TAKE NOTICE that a Small Claims answer has been filed and the electronic copy of the 

answer can be reviewed by utilizing the Docket Lookup on the Tribunal’s website. 

Unless Respondent was defaulted, this case is ready to be scheduled for a Small 

Claims hearing and will be scheduled in the normal course of scheduling. You will 

receive a Notice of Hearing from the Tribunal by e-mail if you have identified an email 

address in the petition or other documentation. The Notice of Hearing will inform you of 

the date, time, and location of your hearing (note that your hearing will likely be 

conducted by telephone). Please read the Notice of Hearing as it includes important 

information.

EVIDENCE: Parties are required to submit all evidence to the Tribunal and send a copy 

to the opposing party at least 21 days before the hearing date even if the documents 

had been submitted to the local Board of Review or the Michigan Department of 

Treasury. If the documents are not timely submitted to the Tribunal and served on the 

opposing party, the documents may be excluded. Documents may be filed with the 

Tribunal by mail or through the Tribunal’s e-filing system. Documents may be sent to the 

opposing party by mail or by e-mail, if the parties agree to service by e-mail.

Alternate Dispute Resolution Options

INFORMAL SETTLEMENT CONFERENCE: Parties have the option of handling this 

case through an informal settlement conference. An informal settlement conference 

is a meeting between the parties and/or their representatives to discuss the issues in a 

case in an effort to settle the case. This process may be an alternative to a hearing with 

a judge and may result in the parties’ filing a Joint Stipulation for Entry of Consent 

Judgment. Visit the Tribunal’s ADR webpage for more information.

NOTE: The parties may not request an informal settlement conference to discuss an 

appeal of a principal residence exemption that was denied by either the Michigan 

Department of Treasury or a County. Also, state taxes levied by the Michigan 

Department of Treasury, such as income taxes, are not subject to the informal 

settlement conference process.

Page 2

MTT Docket No. 26-000418

Page 2 of 2

MEDIATION: Parties have the option of handling this case through mediation. 

Mediation is a voluntary process where a mediator facilitates communication between 

the parties, assists in identifying issues, and helps explore solutions to promote a 

mutually acceptable settlement. This process may be an alternative to a hearing with a 

judge and may result in the parties’ filing a Joint Stipulation for Entry of Consent 

Judgment. Visit the Tribunal’s ADR webpage for more information.

If you have any questions, please contact the Tribunal by phone at (517) 335-9760 or 

email taxtrib@michigan.gov.

By: Tribunal Clerk

Entered: 

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 3

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

Shah H Shafi,

Petitioner,

MICHIGAN TAX TRIBUNAL

SMALL CLAIMS DIVISION

v 

MTT Docket No. 26-000418

City Of Troy,

Respondent.

NOTICE OF FILING

TAKE NOTICE that a Small Claims answer has been filed and the electronic copy of the 

answer can be reviewed by utilizing the Docket Lookup on the Tribunal’s website. 

Unless Respondent was defaulted, this case is ready to be scheduled for a Small 

Claims hearing and will be scheduled in the normal course of scheduling. You will 

receive a Notice of Hearing from the Tribunal by e-mail if you have identified an email 

address in the petition or other documentation. The Notice of Hearing will inform you of 

the date, time, and location of your hearing (note that your hearing will likely be 

conducted by telephone). Please read the Notice of Hearing as it includes important 

information.

EVIDENCE: Parties are required to submit all evidence to the Tribunal and send a copy 

to the opposing party at least 21 days before the hearing date even if the documents 

had been submitted to the local Board of Review or the Michigan Department of 

Treasury. If the documents are not timely submitted to the Tribunal and served on the 

opposing party, the documents may be excluded. Documents may be filed with the 

Tribunal by mail or through the Tribunal’s e-filing system. Documents may be sent to the 

opposing party by mail or by e-mail, if the parties agree to service by e-mail.

Alternate Dispute Resolution Options

INFORMAL SETTLEMENT CONFERENCE: Parties have the option of handling this 

case through an informal settlement conference. An informal settlement conference 

is a meeting between the parties and/or their representatives to discuss the issues in a 

case in an effort to settle the case. This process may be an alternative to a hearing with 

a judge and may result in the parties’ filing a Joint Stipulation for Entry of Consent 

Judgment. Visit the Tribunal’s ADR webpage for more information.

NOTE: The parties may not request an informal settlement conference to discuss an 

appeal of a principal residence exemption that was denied by either the

Page 4

M

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

Michigan Department of Treasury, 

1019 (Rev. 10-25) 

THIS 

IS NOT A TAX BILL 

L-4400 

Notice of Assessment, Taxable Valuation, and Property Classification 

This form is issued under the authority of Public Act 206 of 1893, Sec. 211.24c and Sec.211.34c, as amended. 

This is a mode! assessment notice to be used by the local assessor. 

FROM CITY OF TROY ASSESSING DEPT 

PARCEL IDENTIFICATION 

KELLY M. TIMM 

PARCEL NUMBER: 

88-20-06-351-006 

500 W BIG BEAVER ROAD 

PROPERTY ADDRESS: 

TROY, MICHIGAN 48084-5254 

6227 MALVERN 

TROY, Mi 48098-2138 

SCHOOL DISTRICT CODE: 

63080 

OWNER'S NAME & ADDRESS/PERSON NAMED ON ASSESSMENT ROLL: 

EXEMPTIONS 

Fl San H 

% Exempt As "Homeowners Principal Residence": 

100.00% 

: 

AFIA 

% Exempt As "Qualified Agricultural Property”: 

00% 

eR 2138 

% Exempt As "MBT Industrial Personal™ 

00% 

- 

% Exempt As "MBT Commercial Personal”; 

00% 

Exempt As "Disabled Veteran or Survivin 

Shouse 

9 

[J Yes 

No 

Exempt 

As "Qualified Forest Property™: 

[] Yes 

[X No 

Exempt 

As "Development Property™ 

O Yes 

No 

LEGAL DESCRIPTION: 

T2N, R11E, SEC 

6 CHARNWOOD HILLS LOT 14 

ACCORDING TO MCL 211.34c THIS PROPERTY IS CLASSIFIED AS: 

401 

Residential 

PRIOR YEAR'S CLASSIFICATION IF DIFFERENT: 

401 

Residential 

CHANGE FROM 

PRIOR AMOUNT 

CURRENT TENTATIVE 

. 

PRIOR YEAR TO 

YEAR: 

2025 

AMOUNT YEAR: 

5026 

CURRENT YEAR 

1. TAXABLE VALUE: 

250.960 

1,623,900 

1,272,940 

2. ASSESSED VALUE: 

250,960 

1,523,900 

1,272,940 

3. TENTATIVE EQUALIZATION FACTOR: 

1.000 

4. STATE EQUALIZED VALUE (SEV): 

250,960 

1,523,900 

1,272,940 

5. WAS THERE A TRANSFER OF OWNERSHIP IN2025 

THAT RESULTED IN A TAXABLE VALUE UNCAPPING? [Jes 

No 

6. Assessor Change Reason(s): 

New Construction, Market Adjustment 

The 2026 Infiation rate Multiplier is: 1.027 

Questions regarding the Notice of Assessment, Taxable Valuation, and Property Classification may be directed to the Following: 

Name: 

Telephone Number: 

Email Address: 

KELLY M. TIMM 

(248) 524-3311 

CITYASSESSOR@TROYML.GOV 

March Board of Review Appeal Information. The Board of Review will meet at the following dates and times: 

*THE MARCH BOARD OF REVIEW WILL BE MEETING ON TUESDAY, MARCH 3RD, 2026 FROM 10AM-12PM FOR AN

Page 2

03/23/2026 10:10 AM 

2026 BOARD OF REVIEW DECISION 

FROM 

CITY OF TROY ASSESSING DEPT 

KELLY M. TIMM 

500 W BIG BGBAVER ROAD 

TROY, MICHIGAN 48084-5254 

NAME AND ADDRESS OF OWNER OR PERSON NAMED ON ASSESSMENT ROLL: 

PROPERTY IDENTIFICATION: (Parcel Code required. Property address 

and legal description optional.). 

88-20-06-351-006 

6227 MALVERN 

SHAF], SHAH H 

BEG, SHAFIA 

6227 MALVERN 

SE 

TROY MI 48098-2138 

T2N, RIE, SEC 

6 CHARNWOOD HILLS LOT 14 

THIS PROPERTY IS CLASSIFIED 

40] (RESIDENTIAL-IMPROVED) 

Thank you for attending this years March Board of Review. The Board has reviewed the information you supplied and the data necessary 

to compute your assessment and taxable value, 

The Board has completed their review of parcel number 88-20-06-351-006 

They have made the following determination based on the information you supplied. 

Board of Review Reason For Change 

MARKET ADJUSTMENT 

[2026 ORIGINAL ASSESSED VALUE 

1,523,900 

] 

[2026 "BOARD OF REVIEW" ASSESSED VALUE 

1,400,000 

| 

(If the above amounts are the same, no revisions have occured) 

[2026 ORIGINAL TAXABLE VALUE 

1,523,900 

| 

[2026 "BOARD OF REVIEW" TAXABLE VALUE 

1,400,000 

] 

[2026 PRINCIPAL RESIDENCE EXEMPTION/QUALIFIED AG 

100.0000 

| 

Please feel free to contact the assessor at the address listed above or call if you have any questions. 

“Effective March 1, 2013, the Tribunal is no longer able to accept Small Claims letter appeals, Rather, you are required to file a petition to 

initiate a new Small Claims appeal. Petition forms are available on this website.” 

hitp:/iwww.michigan.gov/taxtrib/0,4677,7-187-38254---,00. 

htm]

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

DEPARTMENT OF LICENSING & REGULATORY AFFAIRS

MICHIGAN TAX TRIBUNAL

SMALL CLAIMS DIVISION

PROPERTY TAX APPEAL ANSWER FORM

VALUATION / UNCAPPING APPEAL

MTT DOCKET NO. 26-000418

 

Respondent’s Contact Information:

Filer Type:

Local Unit of Government

Local Unit of Government:

City Of Troy (OAKLAND)

First Name

M.I.

Last Name

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

City or Town

State

ZIP Code

Telephone Number

E-mail Address

 

Respondent’s Attorney/Authorized Representative’s Contact Information, if any:

First Name

Linda

M.I. 

M

Last Name

McMasters

Firm Name (if any)

City of Troy

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

500 W. Big Beaver

City or Town

Troy

State

Michigan

ZIP Code

48084

Telephone Number

2485243591

E-mail Address

l.mcmasters@troymi.gov

 

 

Subject Property Information:

Are the parcels listed by Petitioner contiguous or adjoining? If no, list all parcels that are adjoining in separate groupings.

 *If necessary, attach a separate sheet.

N/A 

Does the subject property have a principal residence exemption of 50% or more?

Yes

 

Please Explain Your Answer to this Appeal:

Page 2

STATE OF MICHIGAN

DEPARTMENT OF LICENSING & REGULATORY AFFAIRS

MICHIGAN TAX TRIBUNAL

SMALL CLAIMS DIVISION

No errors were calculated on the 2026 assessed value of 2026 taxable value prior to the March Board of Review's decision. The property was uniformly assessed 

according to MCL211.27a of the State of Michigan General Property Tax Act. Further evidence will be submitted 21 days prior to the scheduled hearing.

 

Jurisdictional Issues:

IF PETITIONER IS APPEALING THE TRUE CASH AND/OR TAXABLE VALUES:

Did Petitioner protest the assessment at a Board of Review?

Yes

If Yes, check which Board of Review Petitioner attended:

March

If No, was the Notice of Assessment properly sent to Petitioner prior to the March Board of Review? 

*Submit a copy of the Notice of Assessment with the Answer.

If the July or December Board of Review revised the assessment(s) at issue, did it have authority? 

If yes, please cite the Board’s authority?

Was the assessment(s) at issue established as the result of a clerical error or mutual mistake of fact?

No

If yes, please explain

Is Petitioner appealing from a State Tax Commission Order?

No

If yes, when was it issued?

IF PETITIONER IS APPEALING THE UNCAPPING OF TAXABLE VALUE:

When was the Notice of Uncapping issued?

Under what statutory section was the taxable value uncapped?

 

 

Valuation Information:

Parcel Identification Number:

88-20-06-351-006

Classification of Property: Real (check one)

Page 3

STATE OF MICHIGAN

DEPARTMENT OF LICENSING & REGULATORY AFFAIRS

MICHIGAN TAX TRIBUNAL

SMALL CLAIMS DIVISION

 Residential (check one)

Current Assessed Value as established by the Board of Review:

1400000

Current Taxable Value as established by the Board of Review:

1400000

What do you believe is the fair market value?

2800000

What do you believe is the taxable value?

1400000

 

Electronic Signature *Typing your name below will serve as your signature

Respondent’s Signature: 

/s/ Linda M. McMasters

Attorney or Authorized Agent’s Signature:

/s/

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

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:

Page 4

STATE OF MICHIGAN

GRETCHEN

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

Shah H Shafi,

Petitioner,

MICHIGAN TAX TRIBUNAL

SMALL CLAIMS DIVISION

v 

MTT Docket No. 26-000418

City Of Troy,

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: May 15, 2026

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

Shah H Shafi,

Petitioner,

MICHIGAN TAX TRIBUNAL

SMALL CLAIMS DIVISION

v 

MTT Docket No. 26-000418

City Of Troy,

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: May 15, 2026

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 3

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

Shah H Shafi,

Petitioner,

MICHIGAN TAX TRIBUNAL

SMALL CLAIMS DIVISION

v 

MTT Docket No. 26-000418

City Of Troy,

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: May 15, 2026

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

03/23/2026 

10:10 

AM 

2026 BOARD OF REVIEW DECISION 

FROM 

CITY OF TROY ASSESSING DEPT 

KELLY M. TIMM 

500 

W BIG BEAVER ROAD 

TROY, MICHIGAN 48084-5254 

NAME AND ADDRESS OF OWNER OR PERSON NAMED ON ASSESSMENT ROLL: 

PROPERTY IDENTIFICATION: (Parcel Code required. Property address 

and legal description optional): 

88-20-06-351-006 

6227 

MALVERN 

SHAFI, SHAH H 

ot SHAFIA 

6227 MALVERN 

; 

TROY MI 43058.2138 

T2N, R11E, SEC 

6 CHARNWOOD HILLS LOT 14 

THIS PROPERTY IS CLASSIFIED 

401 (RESIDENTIAL-IMPROVED) 

Thank you for attending this years March Board of Review. The Board has reviewed the information you supplied and the data necessary 

to compute your assessment and taxable value. 

The Board has completed their review of parcel number 88-20-06-351-006 

They have made the following determination based on the information you supplied. 

Board of Review Reason For Change 

MARKET ADJUSTMENT 

[2026 ORIGINAL ASSESSED VALUE 

1,523,900 

| 

[2026 "BOARD OF REVIEW" ASSESSED VALUE 

1,400,000 

| 

(If the above amounts are the same, no revisions have occured) 

[2026 

ORIGINAL TAXABLE VALUE 

1,523,900 

| 

[2026 "BOARD OF REVIEW" TAXABLE VALUE 

1,400,000 

] 

[2026 

PRINCIPAL RESIDENCE EXEMPTION/QUALIFIED AG 

100.0000 

| 

Please feel free to contact the assessor at the address listed above or call if you have any questions. 

“Effective March 1, 2013, the Tribunal is no longer able to accept Small Claims letter appeals. Rather, you are required to file a petition to 

initiate a new Small Claims appeal. Petition forms are available on this website.” 

http://www.michigan.gov/taxtrib/0,4677,7-187-38254---,00.html 

Scanned with 

& CamScanner’;

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

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:

Page 4

STATE OF MICHIGAN

GRETCHEN

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.