Illegal SRO Units Not Rent Stabilized

March 7, 2012

LVT Number: #23922

Landlord sued to evict month-to-month tenant from a two-family building. He claimed that the building was unregulated. Tenant argued that the building was a de facto multiple dwelling subject to rent stabilization because it contained illegal SRO units. He asked the court to dismiss the case. The court ruled for landlord. Since tenant showed no proof that the SRO units could be legalized, the illegally converted units weren't subject to the ETPA. But since there was no Certificate of Occupancy (C of O) permitting the SRO units, landlord couldn't collect use and occupancy fees.

Landlord sued to evict month-to-month tenant from a two-family building. He claimed that the building was unregulated. Tenant argued that the building was a de facto multiple dwelling subject to rent stabilization because it contained illegal SRO units. He asked the court to dismiss the case. The court ruled for landlord. Since tenant showed no proof that the SRO units could be legalized, the illegally converted units weren't subject to the ETPA. But since there was no Certificate of Occupancy (C of O) permitting the SRO units, landlord couldn't collect use and occupancy fees.

Nunez v. Sandler: Index No. 075457/11, NYLJ No. 1202540476247 (Civ. Ct. Queens; 1/17/12; Leverett, J)

Topics

More like this