Apartment Occupant Had No Standing to Appeal Rent Administrator's Ruling

LVT Number: #30285

Landlord applied for a ruling from the DHCR that its building had been substantially rehabilitated and therefore was exempt from rent stabilization. The DRA ruled for landlord. One occupant claiming to be a tenant appealed and lost. Occupant claimed that landlord's proof of rehab work was insufficient. Landlord argued that occupant wasn't a tenant of Apartment 2F, as claimed, or of any other apartment in the building. She therefore had no standing to appeal the DRA's order that the building was exempt from rent stabilization.

Landlord applied for a ruling from the DHCR that its building had been substantially rehabilitated and therefore was exempt from rent stabilization. The DRA ruled for landlord. One occupant claiming to be a tenant appealed and lost. Occupant claimed that landlord's proof of rehab work was insufficient. Landlord argued that occupant wasn't a tenant of Apartment 2F, as claimed, or of any other apartment in the building. She therefore had no standing to appeal the DRA's order that the building was exempt from rent stabilization. Occupant claimed in a supplement to her PAR that she represented the building's tenant association. But the PAR originally was filed by occupant in her name only. The Tenants Association could not subsequently and untimely add themselves to the PAR. No building tenants or tenant association filed a timely PAR to appeal the DRA's decision. 

Ledesma: DHCR Adm. Rev. Docket No. HM210008RT (6/21/19) [4-pg. doc.]

Downloads

HM210008RT.pdf422.66 KB