Landlord Never Got Supplemental Signature and Affirmation Form

LVT Number: 9086

(Decision submitted by James R. Marino of the Manhattan law firm of Kucker Kraus & Bruh, attorneys for the landlord.) Tenant complained of reduced services, claiming that the exterior bricks leaked and that the hallways were dirty. Tenant's complaint stated that the supplemental signature and affirmation form would be sent separately. The DRA got the form with the signatures of other tenants, but landlord didn't. A DHCR inspection revealed that the building exterior needed repair and that the hallways were dirty.

(Decision submitted by James R. Marino of the Manhattan law firm of Kucker Kraus & Bruh, attorneys for the landlord.) Tenant complained of reduced services, claiming that the exterior bricks leaked and that the hallways were dirty. Tenant's complaint stated that the supplemental signature and affirmation form would be sent separately. The DRA got the form with the signatures of other tenants, but landlord didn't. A DHCR inspection revealed that the building exterior needed repair and that the hallways were dirty. The DRA ordered a rent cut for tenant, and for all those tenants whose signatures were on the supplemental affirmation form. Landlord appealed, arguing that it never got the form and that the signatures might be fraudulent. The DHCR revoked the rent cut for tenants whose names were on the supplemental form. Land-lord never got the form, so those tenants can't get a rent cut.

East 11th Street Assoc.: DHCR Adm. Rev. Dckt. No. HC 430193-RO (7/21/94) [7-page document]

Downloads

HC430193-RO.pdf458.2 KB