Lawful Deregulation of Tenant's Apartment Took Place Before HSTPA Took Effect

LVT Number: #32033

Landlord applied for high-rent/high-income deregulation of tenant's rent-stabilized apartment. The DRA ruled for landlord in June 2018 based on the tenant's household income, and stated that the apartment was deregulated effective upon the expiration of the existing lease. Tenant appealed and the DHCR ruled against him in August 2019. Tenant then filed an Article 78 court appeal, claiming that the DHCR's decision was arbitrary and unreasonable. The court and appeals court ruled against tenant. The tenant's existing lease expired on Nov.

Landlord applied for high-rent/high-income deregulation of tenant's rent-stabilized apartment. The DRA ruled for landlord in June 2018 based on the tenant's household income, and stated that the apartment was deregulated effective upon the expiration of the existing lease. Tenant appealed and the DHCR ruled against him in August 2019. Tenant then filed an Article 78 court appeal, claiming that the DHCR's decision was arbitrary and unreasonable. The court and appeals court ruled against tenant. The tenant's existing lease expired on Nov. 30, 2018.  Since the lawful deregulation took effect prior to June 14, 2019, the apartment remained deregulated under the provisions of Rent Stabilization Law amendments under the HSTPA. The DHCR's decision was unaffected by the repeal of luxury deregulation, which took effect prospectively on June 14, 2019.

Matter of Hoy v. DHCR: Index No. 159513/19, App. No. 15797, Case No. 2021-01280, 2022 NY Slip Op 02758, NYLJ 4/28/22 p. 19, col. 2 (App. Div. 1 Dept.; 4/26/22; Renwick, JP, Kapnick, Gesmer, Moulton, Shulman, JJ)