Landlord Claims Building Was Substantially Rehabilitated

LVT Number: #20002

Tenant asked the DHCR to rule on whether he was rent stabilized after landlord notified him that he wasn't. In response, landlord claimed that the building had been substantially rehabilitated after Jan. 1, 1974. Landlord submitted documentation to support its claim and argued that the building wasn't rent stabilized. The DRA ruled for tenant and stated that landlord could file an application with the DHCR to have the apartment declared exempt from rent stabilization based on substantial rehabilitation. Landlord appealed and won.

Tenant asked the DHCR to rule on whether he was rent stabilized after landlord notified him that he wasn't. In response, landlord claimed that the building had been substantially rehabilitated after Jan. 1, 1974. Landlord submitted documentation to support its claim and argued that the building wasn't rent stabilized. The DRA ruled for tenant and stated that landlord could file an application with the DHCR to have the apartment declared exempt from rent stabilization based on substantial rehabilitation. Landlord appealed and won. Since landlord raised the issue, the DRA should have considered and ruled on landlord's claim that the building was exempt from rent stabilization. The case was sent back to the DRA for consideration of this issue.

M & D Management, LLC: DHCR Adm. Rev. Docket No. VE420003RO (9/25/07) [2-pg. doc.]

Downloads

DOC071107VE420003-RO.pdf51.38 KB