DHCR Won't Decide Retroactive Rent Issue

LVT Number: 14154

(Decision submitted by James R. Marino of the Manhattan law firm of Kucker Kraus & Bruh, LLP, attorneys for the landlord.) The DRA ruled that the MCR for tenant's apartment was $600 as of Jan. 1, 1999. Tenant appealed, claiming that landlord wasn't entitled to collect a retroactive rent increase because landlord didn't properly notify tenant of the MCR increase. The DHCR ruled against tenant. A court, and not the DHCR, must decide if landlord can collect retroactive rent if rents stated in the MBR order were greater than those billed by landlord.

(Decision submitted by James R. Marino of the Manhattan law firm of Kucker Kraus & Bruh, LLP, attorneys for the landlord.) The DRA ruled that the MCR for tenant's apartment was $600 as of Jan. 1, 1999. Tenant appealed, claiming that landlord wasn't entitled to collect a retroactive rent increase because landlord didn't properly notify tenant of the MCR increase. The DHCR ruled against tenant. A court, and not the DHCR, must decide if landlord can collect retroactive rent if rents stated in the MBR order were greater than those billed by landlord.

Pogrow: DHCR Adm. Rev. Dckt. No. NF620041RT (4/28/00) [2-pg. doc.]

Downloads

NF620041RT.pdf82.4 KB