- 23 -
purchase of a new car, petitioner did not provide estimated costs
of the repairs.
Because petitioner did not provide supporting documentation
regarding the condition or the value of the house, Ms. Cochran
did not accept petitioner’s reported value. Instead, she
determined a value of $240,000 on the basis of recent sales of
comparable houses.
Petitioner takes exception to Ms. Cochran’s use of sales of
comparable houses and asserts that she should have hired a
professional valuation expert. While an expert might have
provided the most reliable opinion of value, we do not believe
that Ms. Cochran’s failure to seek such an opinion was an abuse
of discretion. Notably, it appears that petitioner’s estimated
value was based on his representative’s comparison of the house
with similar houses recently sold and not on an expert’s opinion.
It was not arbitrary or capricious for Ms. Cochran to value the
house in the same manner.
Petitioner believes that, despite the lack of supporting
documentation, Ms. Cochran abused her discretion by not factoring
in the cost of repairs. Petitioner asserts that, if Ms. Cochran
questioned petitioner’s representations, she could have requested
more information or accepted petitioner’s invitation to view the
house in person. Given the voluminous information provided to
Ms. Cochran, we do not believe that she was under an obligation
Page: Previous 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 NextLast modified: May 25, 2011