DHCR Must Consider Renewal Lease Submitted on Appeal

LVT Number: 17619

(Decision submitted by James R. Marino of the Manhattan law firm of Kucker & Bruh, LLP, attorneys for the landlord.) Tenant complained of a rent overcharge. The DRA ruled for tenant and ordered landlord to refund $21,000, including interest. The DHCR later reduced the amount landlord owed tenant to $14,000 because landlord bought the building at a judicial sale. But the DHCR refused to accept lease documents submitted by landlord for the first time with its PAR as proof of rent history. Landlord appealed, claiming that the DHCR's decision was unreasonable.

(Decision submitted by James R. Marino of the Manhattan law firm of Kucker & Bruh, LLP, attorneys for the landlord.) Tenant complained of a rent overcharge. The DRA ruled for tenant and ordered landlord to refund $21,000, including interest. The DHCR later reduced the amount landlord owed tenant to $14,000 because landlord bought the building at a judicial sale. But the DHCR refused to accept lease documents submitted by landlord for the first time with its PAR as proof of rent history. Landlord appealed, claiming that the DHCR's decision was unreasonable. The court sent the case back to the DHCR for reconsideration. The DHCR had treated tenant's rent overcharge case as a fair market rent appeal for a while, and sent landlord conflicting instructions about what documents to submit. On remand, the DHCR ruled for landlord. The agency would now consider prior tenant's renewal lease in calculating the legal regulated rent.

SRB Realty Corp.: DHCR Adm. Rev. Dckt. No. SH410001RP (9/10/04) [3-pg. doc.]

Downloads

SH410001RP.pdf179.97 KB