ILNews

Tax clinic brings relief to homeowners fighting high assessments

Back to TopCommentsE-mailPrintBookmark and Share

For Sandra Jones, the higher-than-expected property tax bill meant the projects she had planned to turn her house into a home would have to wait.

 

tax-help-15col.jpg Pro bono tax assistance helped homeowner Sandra Jones to get her home reassessed. (IL Photo/ Perry Reichanadter)

The window would remain broken and the small leak under the bathroom sink would continue to drip because more money than she had budgeted for would be going to cover the bigger house payment.

Jones is among the many Hoosier homeowners who are surprised every year by their property assessments. They can file an appeal with the county assessor’s office to get what they believe is a tax bill more appropriate for the value of the home but the process can take a long time to get a response.

At Faegre Baker Daniels LLP, the attorneys suspected there was a gap in pro bono tax help for owners of homes valued at $150,000 or less. They were looking for a volunteer opportunity so they organized the first ever Homeowner Property Tax Clinic.

For two hours on a January evening, they offered their services to Marion County homeowners. They were set up in two rooms of the Legacy Center and helped about 22 individuals.
 

auberry Auberry
ferber Ferber

Brent Auberry, partner at FBD, was the lead attorney on the effort. Judy Ferber, paralegal, organized the evening, modeling it on the Ask-a-Lawyer events.

Initially the FBD organizers did not know how many people would come but soon the three tables of attorneys meeting with clients were expanded to four.

“I had a feeling like a little energy, a little buzz in the air,” Auberry said, recalling the atmosphere of the clinic. He attributed the excitement to people leaving the clinic with either a resolution or a promise that the county assessor would contact them in a few days.

Jones got a resolution that day. Weeks later she still sounded elated as she described walking from the clinic and being done with the process. The clinic, she said, was a “godsend to me.”

When Jones purchased the home, others told her the appraisal was too high. So she filed to have the house reassessed in October but was told the house had already been reassessed in April, four months prior to her purchasing it. When she explained she was asking for a more recent assessment, she was told to file again.

Filing again was not simple. Jones noted going online and trying to find answers can be confusing, and going to the assessor’s office in person to make the appeal meant she would have to miss work.

The tax clinic gave her another option.

“I was extremely happy I did (attend the clinic) because they really adjusted it appropriately,” Jones said.

Along with six FBD attorneys, Auberry brought along two real estate consultants as well as Marion County Assessor Joe O’Connor. The lawyers met with the homeowners on one end of the room, going through the paperwork and listening to the homeowners.

Clients were to come with the Form 11, the tax bill and any supporting information like sale price of another home in neighborhood and the condition of the homeowner’s property. After meeting with the homeowners, learning about their situation and going through the documents, the attorneys could then go directly to the assessor.

“Most important,” Auberry said, “we got the parties in same room at the same time.”

Homeowners have a sense when their properties are overvalued but they don’t always know why. Our job, Auberry said, was to look at the property and see if evidence matches the homeowner’s suspicion.

Without the clinic, Jones is uncertain what she would have done.

“I’m sure I would have had to re-appeal,” she said. “I don’t know, maybe not anything if I had to hire an attorney. I would just have been stuck.”•

ADVERTISEMENT

Post a comment to this story

COMMENTS POLICY
We reserve the right to remove any post that we feel is obscene, profane, vulgar, racist, sexually explicit, abusive, or hateful.
 
You are legally responsible for what you post and your anonymity is not guaranteed.
 
Posts that insult, defame, threaten, harass or abuse other readers or people mentioned in Indiana Lawyer editorial content are also subject to removal. Please respect the privacy of individuals and refrain from posting personal information.
 
No solicitations, spamming or advertisements are allowed. Readers may post links to other informational websites that are relevant to the topic at hand, but please do not link to objectionable material.
 
We may remove messages that are unrelated to the topic, encourage illegal activity, use all capital letters or are unreadable.
 

Messages that are flagged by readers as objectionable will be reviewed and may or may not be removed. Please do not flag a post simply because you disagree with it.

Sponsored by
ADVERTISEMENT
Subscribe to Indiana Lawyer
  1. This sure is not what most who value good governance consider the Rule of Law to entail: "In a letter dated March 2, which Brizzi forwarded to IBJ, the commission dismissed the grievance “on grounds that there is not reasonable cause to believe that you are guilty of misconduct.”" Yet two month later reasonable cause does exist? (Or is the commission forging ahead, the need for reasonable belief be damned? -- A seeming violation of the Rules of Profession Ethics on the part of the commission) Could the rule of law theory cause one to believe that an explanation is in order? Could it be that Hoosier attorneys live under Imperial Law (which is also a t-word that rhymes with infamy) in which the Platonic guardians can do no wrong and never owe the plebeian class any explanation for their powerful actions. (Might makes it right?) Could this be a case of politics directing the commission, as celebrated IU Mauer Professor (the late) Patrick Baude warned was happening 20 years ago in his controversial (whisteblowing) ethics lecture on a quite similar topic: http://www.repository.law.indiana.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1498&context=ilj

  2. I have a case presently pending cert review before the SCOTUS that reveals just how Indiana regulates the bar. I have been denied licensure for life for holding the wrong views and questioning the grand inquisitors as to their duties as to state and federal constitutional due process. True story: https://www.scribd.com/doc/299040839/2016Petitionforcert-to-SCOTUS Shorter, Amici brief serving to frame issue as misuse of govt licensure: https://www.scribd.com/doc/312841269/Thomas-More-Society-Amicus-Brown-v-Ind-Bd-of-Law-Examiners

  3. Here's an idea...how about we MORE heavily regulate the law schools to reduce the surplus of graduates, driving starting salaries up for those new grads, so that we can all pay our insane amount of student loans off in a reasonable amount of time and then be able to afford to do pro bono & low-fee work? I've got friends in other industries, radiology for example, and their schools accept a very limited number of students so there will never be a glut of new grads and everyone's pay stays high. For example, my radiologist friend's school accepted just six new students per year.

  4. I totally agree with John Smith.

  5. An idea that would harm the public good which is protected by licensing. Might as well abolish doctor and health care professions licensing too. Ridiculous. Unrealistic. Would open the floodgates of mischief and abuse. Even veteranarians are licensed. How has deregulation served the public good in banking, for example? Enough ideology already!

ADVERTISEMENT