Landlord Failed to Prove Building Was Substantially Rehabbed

Landlord sought a ruling from the DHCR that its building was exempt from rent stabilization based on a substantial rehabilitation that took place after Jan. 1, 1974. The DRA ruled against landlord, who appealed and lost. Landlord claimed that work commenced in August 2014 and was completed in October 2016. A DOB Letter of Completion issued in January 2021 contradicted landlord's statement that the work was completed in 2016. And the DHCR found that landlord didn't prove that 75 percent of building and apartment systems had been replaced. Among other things, a submitted affidavit from landlord's architect didn't mention five of the 17 systems that the DHCR sought information about pursuant to Operational Bulletin 95-2. And documentation showed complete replacement of perhaps only six of the 17 systems required by Operational Bulletin 95-2. In addition, while the architect's statement claimed there were new kitchen installations, only new plumbing, stoves, and refrigerator installations were specifically mentioned. Landlord also failed to submit all work permits to show that the systems were replaced as claimed. Ultimately, landlord didn't submit adequate proof of complete replacement of 75 percent of all building-wide and apartment systems, and submitted evidence showing that much of the claimed work wasn't performed as a part of the DOB-approved project that the owner said was the basis for its application to the DHCR.

Sumpter Palace LLC: DHCR Adm. Rev. Docket No. LV210016RO (12/5/23)[6-pg. document]