Landlord Can't Submit Second MBR Application

LVT Number: 8038

Landlord filed a 60-day notice of maximum rent adjustment in February 1989, resulting in rent increases for rent-controlled tenants in May 1989. The DRA revoked the rent increases in November 1989 because tenants' rents were higher than the average of the legal regulated rents for apartments with the same numbers of rooms and services. Landlord didn't appeal, but instead filed a second 60-day notice. The DRA found that the second notice was defective because the order revoking the first notice remained in effect for two years. Landlord appealed the second order.

Landlord filed a 60-day notice of maximum rent adjustment in February 1989, resulting in rent increases for rent-controlled tenants in May 1989. The DRA revoked the rent increases in November 1989 because tenants' rents were higher than the average of the legal regulated rents for apartments with the same numbers of rooms and services. Landlord didn't appeal, but instead filed a second 60-day notice. The DRA found that the second notice was defective because the order revoking the first notice remained in effect for two years. Landlord appealed the second order. The DHCR found that the DRA has some discretion in these matters and that its decision in this case was reasonable. Landlord's second notice was defective because the DRA had already issued a final order that wasn't appealed.

490 Bleeker Avenue, Mamaroneck: DHCR Adm. Rev. Dckt. No. EF 930201-RO (5/27/93) [3-page document]

Downloads

EF930201-RO.pdf151.64 KB