C of O Lists Six Units

LVT Number: 13372

Landlord asked the DRA for a ruling that a building was exempt from rent stabilization. The DRA ruled against landlord, and landlord appealed. The DHCR again ruled against landlord. In a prior court proceeding with the same tenants, there was already a finding that on July 1, 1974, a C of O from 1925 was in effect and stated that the building had six stores and six apartments. The C of O wasn't changed until January 1984 when a new C of O was issued listing six stores and five apartments.

Landlord asked the DRA for a ruling that a building was exempt from rent stabilization. The DRA ruled against landlord, and landlord appealed. The DHCR again ruled against landlord. In a prior court proceeding with the same tenants, there was already a finding that on July 1, 1974, a C of O from 1925 was in effect and stated that the building had six stores and six apartments. The C of O wasn't changed until January 1984 when a new C of O was issued listing six stores and five apartments. Since the C of O stated that there were six apartments on the base date, the building is rent-stabilized.

Alter: DHCR Adm. Rev. Dckt. No. IK220008RO (4/28/99) [3-pg. doc.]

Downloads

IK220008RO.pdf117.16 KB