Landlord Claims Building Was Substantially Rehabilitated

LVT Number: #25998

Tenant claimed that he was rent stabilized and asked the DHCR to determine his status. The DRA ruled for tenant. Although J-51 benefits for the building had expired, the DRA found that the 11-unit building was previously rent stabilized and therefore remained so after the J-51 expiration date. Landlord appealed, and the case was reopened for further review. Landlord pointed out that it wasn't given a chance to respond to tenant's claims before the DRA decided the case.

Tenant claimed that he was rent stabilized and asked the DHCR to determine his status. The DRA ruled for tenant. Although J-51 benefits for the building had expired, the DRA found that the 11-unit building was previously rent stabilized and therefore remained so after the J-51 expiration date. Landlord appealed, and the case was reopened for further review. Landlord pointed out that it wasn't given a chance to respond to tenant's claims before the DRA decided the case. Landlord claimed that the building was substantially rehabilitated in 1990, and the building then received J-51 benefits. Now that the J-51 benefits had expired, the building was exempt from rent stabilization because the substantial rehab took place after Jan. 1, 1974. The DHCR would allow landlord to submit further proof and review the issue.

South Heights Development Corp.: DHCR Adm. Rev. Docket No. BR210033RO

Downloads

BR210033RO.pdf1.28 MB