Landlord Claims Building Was Substantially Rehabilitated

LVT Number: 19240

Tenant asked the DHCR to determine whether he was rent stabilized. Tenant claimed that landlord wanted to raise his rent from $600 to $850 per month. In response, landlord claimed that the building had been substantially rehabilitated after Jan. 1, 1974, and therefore was exempt from rent stabilization. The DRA ruled for tenant, finding that the building was rent stabilized because it contained six or more apartments on the base date, and that landlord could file an application if it claimed that the building had been substantially rehabilitated. Landlord appealed and won.

Tenant asked the DHCR to determine whether he was rent stabilized. Tenant claimed that landlord wanted to raise his rent from $600 to $850 per month. In response, landlord claimed that the building had been substantially rehabilitated after Jan. 1, 1974, and therefore was exempt from rent stabilization. The DRA ruled for tenant, finding that the building was rent stabilized because it contained six or more apartments on the base date, and that landlord could file an application if it claimed that the building had been substantially rehabilitated. Landlord appealed and won. Landlord didn't have to obtain an order of deregulation from DHCR before claiming that the building was exempt. The case was sent back to the DRA to investigate landlord's claim that the building had been substantially rehabilitated.

Portia Properties, LLC: DHCR Adm. Rev. Docket No. UC620008RO 9/21/06 [3-pg. doc.]

Downloads

UC620008RO.pdf206.23 KB