Insufficient Proof of Substantial Rehabilitation

Landlord asked the DHCR to declare that the building was exempt from rent stabilization based on substantial rehabilitation by prior landlord in 1991. The DRA ruled against landlord, finding insufficient proof that at least 75 percent of the building and apartment systems had been replaced in 1991. Landlord appealed, claiming that the DRA was incorrect. Landlord also claimed that the building was at least 80 percent vacant between 1986 and 1991, and that this showed that the building was in substandard condition at the time it was rehabbed. The DHCR ruled against landlord. Landlord didn't prove that the building was in substandard condition at the time extensive work was done in 1991. Prior landlord filed rent registrations for the years 1986 through 1991 in 1993, stating that the apartments were vacant. Because the registrations were filed so late, they didn't prove the vacancies. In addition, a new Certificate of Occupancy issued in 1993 indicated that there had been no change in the number of apartments since 1965. And documents submitted by landlord showed that prior landlord didn't replace at least 75 percent of the building and apartment systems. Steam piping was connected to an existing heating system. Less than 100 percent of kitchen systems and apartment floors were replaced. The building's interior stairway wasn't replaced. And ceilings and walls were merely refinished and repainted.

338 West 46th Street Realty LLC: DHCR Adm. Rev. Docket No. VA410010RO (10/2/07) [7-pg. doc.]