DHCR Never Sent Landlord Copy of MCI Order

LVT Number: 9049

(Decision submitted by Patrick K. Munson of the Manhattan law firm of Kucker Kraus & Bruh, attorneys for the landlord.) Rent-stabilized tenant complained of a rent overcharge. Landlord claimed that the DHCR never sent it an official copy of the January 1986 order granting MCI rent increases, and that it was only trying to collect the appropriate MCI rent hike retroactively. The DRA ruled for tenant, and landlord appealed. The DHCR also ruled for tenant, and landlord appealed again. The court sent the case back to the DHCR. This time, landlord wins.

(Decision submitted by Patrick K. Munson of the Manhattan law firm of Kucker Kraus & Bruh, attorneys for the landlord.) Rent-stabilized tenant complained of a rent overcharge. Landlord claimed that the DHCR never sent it an official copy of the January 1986 order granting MCI rent increases, and that it was only trying to collect the appropriate MCI rent hike retroactively. The DRA ruled for tenant, and landlord appealed. The DHCR also ruled for tenant, and landlord appealed again. The court sent the case back to the DHCR. This time, landlord wins. Since the DHCR never sent landlord the MCI order, it can collect the MCI rent hikes retroactively.

Seadyck Realty Co.: DHCR Adm. Rev. Dckt. Nos. IG 510016-RP, FH 510043-RO (7/29/94) [3-page document]

Downloads

IG510016-RP.pdf215.69 KB