More Facts Needed to Decide If Five Buildings Are Horizontal Multiple Dwelling

LVT Number: 19525

Tenant complained of rent overcharge. Landlord claimed that the building wasn't rent stabilized, because it contained fewer than six apartments. Tenant argued that the building was part of a horizontal multiple dwelling with four other buildings. Together, the buildings had at least six apartments, and prior landlord had treated them as rent stabilized for over 20 years. The DHCR ruled for tenant and ordered landlord to refund $13,482 in overcharges, including triple damages. Landlord appealed. The court sent the case back to the DHCR for further consideration.

Tenant complained of rent overcharge. Landlord claimed that the building wasn't rent stabilized, because it contained fewer than six apartments. Tenant argued that the building was part of a horizontal multiple dwelling with four other buildings. Together, the buildings had at least six apartments, and prior landlord had treated them as rent stabilized for over 20 years. The DHCR ruled for tenant and ordered landlord to refund $13,482 in overcharges, including triple damages. Landlord appealed. The court sent the case back to the DHCR for further consideration. The DHCR ruled that the case must go back to the DRA. More facts were needed to determine whether the buildings shared common facilities such as a sewer line, water main, and heating plant, and whether the buildings were owned and operated by one landlord.

Junction Realty, LLC: DHCR Adm. Rev. Docket No. UL110004RP (1/11/07) [2-pg. doc.]

Downloads

UL 110004-RP.pdf70.5 KB