c) The evidence presented by the Petitioners lacked probative value. While the Petitioners offered a rental contract showing that the subject property is rented for $600 per month, that contract is from July 2013. The Petitioners failed to explain how this related to the valuation date of March 1, 2012. Furthermore, the Petitioners could not remember what amount, if any, they were renting the property for in March 2012.3
d) The Petitioners’ evidence regarding their purchases price similarly lacks probative value. They purchased the subject property in 2008 for $16,000, but they made no attempt to relate the subject property’s 2008 purchase price to the March 1, 2012, valuation date. Consequently, the Board need not address the question of whether that purchase met the requirements of a market sale.
e) Because the Petitioners failed to present any evidence regarding the subject property’s value as of March 1, 2012, they failed to raise a prima facie case that the 2012 assessment is incorrect.