Former Mitchell-Lama Landlord Can't Charge Separate Fee for A/C Use

LVT Number: 18074

Tenant complained of a rent overcharge. After the building's Mitchell-Lama status ended, tenant became subject to rent stabilization. Under Mitchell-Lama, landlord had charged tenant $18.40 per month for two air conditioners. Landlord now charged tenant $39.80 per month for the two units. The DRA ruled for tenant. Landlord appealed and lost. Landlord couldn't apply the DHCR rules to air-conditioner charges. Landlord must include former air-conditioner charge in tenant's base rent under stabilization. Landlord could collect no further separate air-conditioner charges.

Tenant complained of a rent overcharge. After the building's Mitchell-Lama status ended, tenant became subject to rent stabilization. Under Mitchell-Lama, landlord had charged tenant $18.40 per month for two air conditioners. Landlord now charged tenant $39.80 per month for the two units. The DRA ruled for tenant. Landlord appealed and lost. Landlord couldn't apply the DHCR rules to air-conditioner charges. Landlord must include former air-conditioner charge in tenant's base rent under stabilization. Landlord could collect no further separate air-conditioner charges.

Sky View Towers Holding Inc.: DHCR Adm. Rev. Dckt. No. RI110047RO (2/17/05) [3-pg. doc.]

Downloads

RI110047RO.pdf208.26 KB