REOs, prop 13, and tax assessment‎

[bearishgurl]

pemeliza, your reciept of a supplemental bill nine months after purchase is well within the time frame for receiving a supplemental bill from a county assessor. As you know, the tax collected from you in escrow was reflective of your portion of the previous owners bill. You probably thought you were due a refund instead of receiving a supplemental bill because you pd. LESS for the property than the prev. owner’s assessment. Hopefully, there is enough in your “overpayment” to cover the supplemental bill.

CA assessors not only have the right to add 2% per year onto a non-exempted homeowner’s property tax bill pursuant to Prop 13, they have the right to assess the property by sq. ft. using the sales comps of the last six months from the area it is located in. (Co. assessors actually haven’t been routinely increasing tax bills by 2% in the last two years of those properties which were purchased since about 2004, but voluntarily decreasing them to avoid more assessment appeal applicants.)

Make sure when you are faxing the SD ARCC appraiser sales comps that you keep your cover sheet and fax confirmation sheet or e-mails as Econprof posted. Even though the comps you provided were “open market at arms length,” they are “distress” sales. If that is all that sold around there with similar sq. footage to your property, then the assessor will have to accept them. Are there any “non-distress” comparable sales to your property which took place in the last six months that the appraiser may want to use? If so, find out what they are, now.

Even if you can get the assessor to agree to assess your property for FY 10/11 at it’s REO price + 2%, once the rest of the REOs “shake out” in your area of 92103 and non-distress sales begin being routinely conducted once more, the assessor will have the right to increase your assessment for the next tax year to the market-rate purchased comparable properties.

Did the people you know that “scammed the system” buy an REO in Mission Hills, Pt. Loma or other similarly-situated coveted coastal area, such as you did?? If they purchased in areas with high or very high numbers of foreclosures and REO’s, then the assessor knows they cannot recover taxes from a “market-rate assessment” from these properties for at least several years. They agreed to the supplemental refund on these buyers because they are just trying to save themselves and the Clerk of the Board work by reducing the amount of assessment-appeal applicants in their already two-year long overcrowded pipeline.

If the appraiser doesn’t satisfy you informally within 30-45 days, you will have to pay the supp. bill and immed. file an assessment appeal, to get yourself in the pipeline. You will then receive a postcard within about a month telling you where your numbered position is in the pipeline.

pemeliza, I know the supp. bill came as a shock but just be grateful you got a good deal in a coveted area. I don’t believe you’ll be sorry for your purchase down the line, as so many buyers are now.

[pemeliza]

“even if you can get the assessor to agree to assess your property for FY 10/11 at it’s REO price + 2%, once the rest of the REOs “shake out” in your area of 92103 and non-distress sales begin being routinely conducted once more, the assessor will have the right to increase your assessment for the next tax year to the market-rate purchased comparable properties.”

I am not asking for a temporary reassessment to market value, rather I am challenging the assessment that occurred as part of the transfer of ownership last fall. As far as I know these “initial” assessments are limited to 2% a year change regardless of whether or not the market improves.

I went back and looked at all of the sales in my neighborhood going back 6 months and forward 3 months. The only way they could have possibly got the price they did was to use “turn-key” properties that were heavily upgraded which our house is not.

My personal opinion is that they are basing their estimate of value on the fact that the property tax valuation was once in the stratosphere and they just can’t accept that prices really have come down that far.

Thanks for all the advice … we plan to fight this with every means we have available.

[pemeliza]

“even if you can get the assessor to agree to assess your property for FY 10/11 at it’s REO price + 2%, once the rest of the REOs “shake out” in your area of 92103 and non-distress sales begin being routinely conducted once more, the assessor will have the right to increase your assessment for the next tax year to the market-rate purchased comparable properties.”

I am not asking for a temporary reassessment to market value, rather I am challenging the assessment that occurred as part of the transfer of ownership last fall. As far as I know these “initial” assessments are limited to 2% a year change regardless of whether or not the market improves.

I went back and looked at all of the sales in my neighborhood going back 6 months and forward 3 months. The only way they could have possibly got the price they did was to use “turn-key” properties that were heavily upgraded which our house is not.

My personal opinion is that they are basing their estimate of value on the fact that the property tax valuation was once in the stratosphere and they just can’t accept that prices really have come down that far.

Thanks for all the advice … we plan to fight this with every means we have available.

[pemeliza]

“even if you can get the assessor to agree to assess your property for FY 10/11 at it’s REO price + 2%, once the rest of the REOs “shake out” in your area of 92103 and non-distress sales begin being routinely conducted once more, the assessor will have the right to increase your assessment for the next tax year to the market-rate purchased comparable properties.”

I am not asking for a temporary reassessment to market value, rather I am challenging the assessment that occurred as part of the transfer of ownership last fall. As far as I know these “initial” assessments are limited to 2% a year change regardless of whether or not the market improves.

I went back and looked at all of the sales in my neighborhood going back 6 months and forward 3 months. The only way they could have possibly got the price they did was to use “turn-key” properties that were heavily upgraded which our house is not.

My personal opinion is that they are basing their estimate of value on the fact that the property tax valuation was once in the stratosphere and they just can’t accept that prices really have come down that far.

Thanks for all the advice … we plan to fight this with every means we have available.

[pemeliza]

“even if you can get the assessor to agree to assess your property for FY 10/11 at it’s REO price + 2%, once the rest of the REOs “shake out” in your area of 92103 and non-distress sales begin being routinely conducted once more, the assessor will have the right to increase your assessment for the next tax year to the market-rate purchased comparable properties.”

I am not asking for a temporary reassessment to market value, rather I am challenging the assessment that occurred as part of the transfer of ownership last fall. As far as I know these “initial” assessments are limited to 2% a year change regardless of whether or not the market improves.

I went back and looked at all of the sales in my neighborhood going back 6 months and forward 3 months. The only way they could have possibly got the price they did was to use “turn-key” properties that were heavily upgraded which our house is not.

My personal opinion is that they are basing their estimate of value on the fact that the property tax valuation was once in the stratosphere and they just can’t accept that prices really have come down that far.

Thanks for all the advice … we plan to fight this with every means we have available.

[pemeliza]

“even if you can get the assessor to agree to assess your property for FY 10/11 at it’s REO price + 2%, once the rest of the REOs “shake out” in your area of 92103 and non-distress sales begin being routinely conducted once more, the assessor will have the right to increase your assessment for the next tax year to the market-rate purchased comparable properties.”

I am not asking for a temporary reassessment to market value, rather I am challenging the assessment that occurred as part of the transfer of ownership last fall. As far as I know these “initial” assessments are limited to 2% a year change regardless of whether or not the market improves.

I went back and looked at all of the sales in my neighborhood going back 6 months and forward 3 months. The only way they could have possibly got the price they did was to use “turn-key” properties that were heavily upgraded which our house is not.

My personal opinion is that they are basing their estimate of value on the fact that the property tax valuation was once in the stratosphere and they just can’t accept that prices really have come down that far.

Thanks for all the advice … we plan to fight this with every means we have available.

[bearishgurl]

[quote=pemeliza]I am not asking for a temporary reassessment to market value, rather I am challenging the assessment that occurred as part of the transfer of ownership last fall. As far as I know these “initial” assessments are limited to 2% a year change regardless of whether or not the market improves.

I went back and looked at all of the sales in my neighborhood going back 6 months and forward 3 months. The only way they could have possibly got the price they did was to use “turn-key” properties that were heavily upgraded which our house is not.

My personal opinion is that they are basing their estimate of value on the fact that the property tax valuation was once in the stratosphere and they just can’t accept that prices really have come down that far.

Thanks for all the advice … we plan to fight this with every means we have available.[/quote]

pemeliza, I have not sought out the exact RevTax Code in the CA legislation that applies to Adjusted Base Year Value upon filing of a Change of Ownership form (done in escrow on an “arms-length” sale),” but I believe it is entirely possible that Mission Hills was NOT AMOUNG the assessor’s parcel maps that were/are eligible for the “Decline in Value Assessment Program.” I know my area was/is eligible as some of my neighbors who are NOT Prop. 13 eligible received automatically-lowered tax bills last fall. (I did too, but mine was nearly $1000 lower due to a stipulated agreement upon appeal, foregoing my right to a hg.) My appeal was filed July 2008 and I was presented with and signed the agreement just after Thanksgiving 2009 (just before the first installment of FY 09/10 taxes were due).

In addition, I do not believe the “arms-length” transactions involving trustees sales, probate sales or purchase of REOs qualifies the property for the “Decline in Value Assessment Program” if the surrounding parcel map(s) do not qualify. Do not know about short-sales but would assume they DO QUALIFY. Any Piggs know??

In any case, you have only 60 days from the postmark on your supplemental bill to file an appeal on it, so don’t let the co. appraiser string you along.

Who knows? Maybe you’ll succeed in getting your particular parcel map included in the DVAP 🙂

[bearishgurl]

[quote=pemeliza]I am not asking for a temporary reassessment to market value, rather I am challenging the assessment that occurred as part of the transfer of ownership last fall. As far as I know these “initial” assessments are limited to 2% a year change regardless of whether or not the market improves.

I went back and looked at all of the sales in my neighborhood going back 6 months and forward 3 months. The only way they could have possibly got the price they did was to use “turn-key” properties that were heavily upgraded which our house is not.

My personal opinion is that they are basing their estimate of value on the fact that the property tax valuation was once in the stratosphere and they just can’t accept that prices really have come down that far.

Thanks for all the advice … we plan to fight this with every means we have available.[/quote]

pemeliza, I have not sought out the exact RevTax Code in the CA legislation that applies to Adjusted Base Year Value upon filing of a Change of Ownership form (done in escrow on an “arms-length” sale),” but I believe it is entirely possible that Mission Hills was NOT AMOUNG the assessor’s parcel maps that were/are eligible for the “Decline in Value Assessment Program.” I know my area was/is eligible as some of my neighbors who are NOT Prop. 13 eligible received automatically-lowered tax bills last fall. (I did too, but mine was nearly $1000 lower due to a stipulated agreement upon appeal, foregoing my right to a hg.) My appeal was filed July 2008 and I was presented with and signed the agreement just after Thanksgiving 2009 (just before the first installment of FY 09/10 taxes were due).

In addition, I do not believe the “arms-length” transactions involving trustees sales, probate sales or purchase of REOs qualifies the property for the “Decline in Value Assessment Program” if the surrounding parcel map(s) do not qualify. Do not know about short-sales but would assume they DO QUALIFY. Any Piggs know??

In any case, you have only 60 days from the postmark on your supplemental bill to file an appeal on it, so don’t let the co. appraiser string you along.

Who knows? Maybe you’ll succeed in getting your particular parcel map included in the DVAP 🙂

[bearishgurl]

[quote=pemeliza]I am not asking for a temporary reassessment to market value, rather I am challenging the assessment that occurred as part of the transfer of ownership last fall. As far as I know these “initial” assessments are limited to 2% a year change regardless of whether or not the market improves.

I went back and looked at all of the sales in my neighborhood going back 6 months and forward 3 months. The only way they could have possibly got the price they did was to use “turn-key” properties that were heavily upgraded which our house is not.

My personal opinion is that they are basing their estimate of value on the fact that the property tax valuation was once in the stratosphere and they just can’t accept that prices really have come down that far.

Thanks for all the advice … we plan to fight this with every means we have available.[/quote]

pemeliza, I have not sought out the exact RevTax Code in the CA legislation that applies to Adjusted Base Year Value upon filing of a Change of Ownership form (done in escrow on an “arms-length” sale),” but I believe it is entirely possible that Mission Hills was NOT AMOUNG the assessor’s parcel maps that were/are eligible for the “Decline in Value Assessment Program.” I know my area was/is eligible as some of my neighbors who are NOT Prop. 13 eligible received automatically-lowered tax bills last fall. (I did too, but mine was nearly $1000 lower due to a stipulated agreement upon appeal, foregoing my right to a hg.) My appeal was filed July 2008 and I was presented with and signed the agreement just after Thanksgiving 2009 (just before the first installment of FY 09/10 taxes were due).

In addition, I do not believe the “arms-length” transactions involving trustees sales, probate sales or purchase of REOs qualifies the property for the “Decline in Value Assessment Program” if the surrounding parcel map(s) do not qualify. Do not know about short-sales but would assume they DO QUALIFY. Any Piggs know??

In any case, you have only 60 days from the postmark on your supplemental bill to file an appeal on it, so don’t let the co. appraiser string you along.

Who knows? Maybe you’ll succeed in getting your particular parcel map included in the DVAP 🙂

[bearishgurl]

[quote=pemeliza]I am not asking for a temporary reassessment to market value, rather I am challenging the assessment that occurred as part of the transfer of ownership last fall. As far as I know these “initial” assessments are limited to 2% a year change regardless of whether or not the market improves.

I went back and looked at all of the sales in my neighborhood going back 6 months and forward 3 months. The only way they could have possibly got the price they did was to use “turn-key” properties that were heavily upgraded which our house is not.

My personal opinion is that they are basing their estimate of value on the fact that the property tax valuation was once in the stratosphere and they just can’t accept that prices really have come down that far.

Thanks for all the advice … we plan to fight this with every means we have available.[/quote]

pemeliza, I have not sought out the exact RevTax Code in the CA legislation that applies to Adjusted Base Year Value upon filing of a Change of Ownership form (done in escrow on an “arms-length” sale),” but I believe it is entirely possible that Mission Hills was NOT AMOUNG the assessor’s parcel maps that were/are eligible for the “Decline in Value Assessment Program.” I know my area was/is eligible as some of my neighbors who are NOT Prop. 13 eligible received automatically-lowered tax bills last fall. (I did too, but mine was nearly $1000 lower due to a stipulated agreement upon appeal, foregoing my right to a hg.) My appeal was filed July 2008 and I was presented with and signed the agreement just after Thanksgiving 2009 (just before the first installment of FY 09/10 taxes were due).

In addition, I do not believe the “arms-length” transactions involving trustees sales, probate sales or purchase of REOs qualifies the property for the “Decline in Value Assessment Program” if the surrounding parcel map(s) do not qualify. Do not know about short-sales but would assume they DO QUALIFY. Any Piggs know??

In any case, you have only 60 days from the postmark on your supplemental bill to file an appeal on it, so don’t let the co. appraiser string you along.

Who knows? Maybe you’ll succeed in getting your particular parcel map included in the DVAP 🙂

[bearishgurl]

[quote=pemeliza]I am not asking for a temporary reassessment to market value, rather I am challenging the assessment that occurred as part of the transfer of ownership last fall. As far as I know these “initial” assessments are limited to 2% a year change regardless of whether or not the market improves.

I went back and looked at all of the sales in my neighborhood going back 6 months and forward 3 months. The only way they could have possibly got the price they did was to use “turn-key” properties that were heavily upgraded which our house is not.

My personal opinion is that they are basing their estimate of value on the fact that the property tax valuation was once in the stratosphere and they just can’t accept that prices really have come down that far.

Thanks for all the advice … we plan to fight this with every means we have available.[/quote]

pemeliza, I have not sought out the exact RevTax Code in the CA legislation that applies to Adjusted Base Year Value upon filing of a Change of Ownership form (done in escrow on an “arms-length” sale),” but I believe it is entirely possible that Mission Hills was NOT AMOUNG the assessor’s parcel maps that were/are eligible for the “Decline in Value Assessment Program.” I know my area was/is eligible as some of my neighbors who are NOT Prop. 13 eligible received automatically-lowered tax bills last fall. (I did too, but mine was nearly $1000 lower due to a stipulated agreement upon appeal, foregoing my right to a hg.) My appeal was filed July 2008 and I was presented with and signed the agreement just after Thanksgiving 2009 (just before the first installment of FY 09/10 taxes were due).

In addition, I do not believe the “arms-length” transactions involving trustees sales, probate sales or purchase of REOs qualifies the property for the “Decline in Value Assessment Program” if the surrounding parcel map(s) do not qualify. Do not know about short-sales but would assume they DO QUALIFY. Any Piggs know??

In any case, you have only 60 days from the postmark on your supplemental bill to file an appeal on it, so don’t let the co. appraiser string you along.

Who knows? Maybe you’ll succeed in getting your particular parcel map included in the DVAP 🙂

[SK in CV]

[quote=bearishgurl]
In addition, I do not believe the “arms-length” transactions involving trustees sales, probate sales or purchase of REOs qualifies the property for the “Decline in Value Assessment Program” if the surrounding parcel map(s) do not qualify. Do not know about short-sales but would assume they DO QUALIFY. Any Piggs know??

[/quote]

I’m a bit confused by this. I don’t think the OP is requesting a decline in value assessment. I think it’s the inital assessment usually based on the actual price he paid. I do understand how the assessor can argue that a trustee sale is at something other than fair market value or arms length. Not so with a REO. A seller who typically lists the property in MLS. A buyer who makes an offer. Open market negotiaation. (I do know the reality is sometimes a bit different.) I’m not familar with the regulations on this but it does seem unreasonable for a REO sale to not be subject to the identical property tax valuation process as any other traditional sale. Anyone have any insight?

[SK in CV]

[quote=bearishgurl]
In addition, I do not believe the “arms-length” transactions involving trustees sales, probate sales or purchase of REOs qualifies the property for the “Decline in Value Assessment Program” if the surrounding parcel map(s) do not qualify. Do not know about short-sales but would assume they DO QUALIFY. Any Piggs know??

[/quote]

I’m a bit confused by this. I don’t think the OP is requesting a decline in value assessment. I think it’s the inital assessment usually based on the actual price he paid. I do understand how the assessor can argue that a trustee sale is at something other than fair market value or arms length. Not so with a REO. A seller who typically lists the property in MLS. A buyer who makes an offer. Open market negotiaation. (I do know the reality is sometimes a bit different.) I’m not familar with the regulations on this but it does seem unreasonable for a REO sale to not be subject to the identical property tax valuation process as any other traditional sale. Anyone have any insight?

[SK in CV]

[quote=bearishgurl]
In addition, I do not believe the “arms-length” transactions involving trustees sales, probate sales or purchase of REOs qualifies the property for the “Decline in Value Assessment Program” if the surrounding parcel map(s) do not qualify. Do not know about short-sales but would assume they DO QUALIFY. Any Piggs know??

[/quote]

I’m a bit confused by this. I don’t think the OP is requesting a decline in value assessment. I think it’s the inital assessment usually based on the actual price he paid. I do understand how the assessor can argue that a trustee sale is at something other than fair market value or arms length. Not so with a REO. A seller who typically lists the property in MLS. A buyer who makes an offer. Open market negotiaation. (I do know the reality is sometimes a bit different.) I’m not familar with the regulations on this but it does seem unreasonable for a REO sale to not be subject to the identical property tax valuation process as any other traditional sale. Anyone have any insight?

[SK in CV]

[quote=bearishgurl]
In addition, I do not believe the “arms-length” transactions involving trustees sales, probate sales or purchase of REOs qualifies the property for the “Decline in Value Assessment Program” if the surrounding parcel map(s) do not qualify. Do not know about short-sales but would assume they DO QUALIFY. Any Piggs know??

[/quote]

I’m a bit confused by this. I don’t think the OP is requesting a decline in value assessment. I think it’s the inital assessment usually based on the actual price he paid. I do understand how the assessor can argue that a trustee sale is at something other than fair market value or arms length. Not so with a REO. A seller who typically lists the property in MLS. A buyer who makes an offer. Open market negotiaation. (I do know the reality is sometimes a bit different.) I’m not familar with the regulations on this but it does seem unreasonable for a REO sale to not be subject to the identical property tax valuation process as any other traditional sale. Anyone have any insight?

[Author]

Posts