Landlord Properly Deemed Renewal Lease to Be in Effect

LVT Number: 19502

Tenants, husband and wife, complained that landlord didn't offer them a renewal lease. The DRA ruled against tenants. Landlord showed that it sent tenants a renewal offer and, as requested by the husband, added the wife's name to the renewal lease. But tenants didn't sign the renewal, and landlord properly deemed the renewal lease to be in effect. Tenants appealed. They said landlord's renewal offer was untimely, so there could be no lease in effect for the period commencing Aug. 1, 2005. The DHCR ruled against tenants.

Tenants, husband and wife, complained that landlord didn't offer them a renewal lease. The DRA ruled against tenants. Landlord showed that it sent tenants a renewal offer and, as requested by the husband, added the wife's name to the renewal lease. But tenants didn't sign the renewal, and landlord properly deemed the renewal lease to be in effect. Tenants appealed. They said landlord's renewal offer was untimely, so there could be no lease in effect for the period commencing Aug. 1, 2005. The DHCR ruled against tenants. Landlord showed a certificate of mailing indicating that between 90 and 150 days before the last lease expired, landlord had sent tenants the renewal lease offer. Tenants didn't show that landlord mailed them something besides the renewal offer at this time. Therefore, landlord presumably sent tenants a proper renewal offer and properly deemed the renewal lease to be in effect when tenants didn't sign.

Taveras: DHCR Adm. Rev. Docket No. UK410004RT (1/29/07) [3-pg. doc.]

Downloads

UK 410004-RT.pdf85.76 KB