Change in Time Limit for Filing Doesn't Bar Pending MCI Application

LVT Number: #21083

Landlord applied for MCI rent hikes based on a building-wide improvement. The DRA ruled for landlord in part. Landlord filed its MCI application more than two years before the work was completed. So no increase was allowed for rent-stabilized tenants. But at the time landlord filed its application, there was no time limit on filing for MCI rent hikes for rent-controlled tenants. Tenants appealed. On Oct. 12, 2005, while tenants’ PAR was pending, the rent-control regulations were amended to apply the two-year time limit to rent-controlled tenants also.

Landlord applied for MCI rent hikes based on a building-wide improvement. The DRA ruled for landlord in part. Landlord filed its MCI application more than two years before the work was completed. So no increase was allowed for rent-stabilized tenants. But at the time landlord filed its application, there was no time limit on filing for MCI rent hikes for rent-controlled tenants. Tenants appealed. On Oct. 12, 2005, while tenants’ PAR was pending, the rent-control regulations were amended to apply the two-year time limit to rent-controlled tenants also. Tenants then argued that this time limit should apply to them. The DHCR ruled against tenants. If a regulation is amended while a PAR is pending, the DHCR will rule based on the new regulation unless this would cause undue hardship. In this case, barring the MCI rent hike for rent-controlled tenants would be a hardship to landlord. There was no time limit when landlord filed its MCI application or when tenant’s PAR was filed on June 1, 2005.

65 East 96th Street: DHCR Adm. Rev. Docket No. WJ420006RP (11/13/08) [3-pg. doc.]

Downloads

WJ420006RP.pdf243.74 KB