Landlord Didn't Prove Apartment Was Permanently Exempt from Stabilization

LVT Number: #28342

Tenant complained of a reduction in services. The DRA ruled for tenant and reduced his rent. Landlord appealed and lost. Landlord argued that the DRA ignored its response that the apartment was registered as permanently exempt (PE) in 2009, and therefore, the DHCR had no authority to rule on tenant's service complaint. The DHCR noted that landlord didn't raise the PE issue in its initial response to tenant's complaint. Tenant pointed out that the apartment had two designations, both as Apt. 2F and Apt. 3. The DHCR's rent registration records showed that Apt.

Tenant complained of a reduction in services. The DRA ruled for tenant and reduced his rent. Landlord appealed and lost. Landlord argued that the DRA ignored its response that the apartment was registered as permanently exempt (PE) in 2009, and therefore, the DHCR had no authority to rule on tenant's service complaint. The DHCR noted that landlord didn't raise the PE issue in its initial response to tenant's complaint. Tenant pointed out that the apartment had two designations, both as Apt. 2F and Apt. 3. The DHCR's rent registration records showed that Apt. 2F was rent stabilized, while Apt. 3 was registered as PE in 2009 while Apt. 2F wasn't registered that year. Since the information in the DHCR's rent registration system was inconsistent, and landlord didn't provide proof, such as a court or DHCR order that the apartment was PE, there was insufficient proof to determine the regulatory status of the apartment. Landlord could file an application to the DHCR for an administrative determination in order to ascertain the apartment's rent-regulatory status.

3609-15th Ave. LLC: DHCR Adm. Rev. Docket No. FP210042RO (2/2/18) [3-pg. doc.]

Downloads

FP210042RO.pdf1.31 MB