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.
