New Landlord Improperly Locked Tenant Out of Apartment

LVT Number: #27666

Tenant sued landlord, seeking to be restored to possession of a rent-stabilized apartment. Tenant had previously temporarily located to an apartment in an adjoining building so that prior landlord could complete necessary repairs to her apartment. A 2008 agreement signed by tenant and prior landlord in court stated that tenant would be permitted to return to her apartment after repairs were completed, within 60 days. Tenant retained keys to her apartment and left personal items there. The repairs weren’t completed within 60 days and the building fell into foreclosure.

Tenant sued landlord, seeking to be restored to possession of a rent-stabilized apartment. Tenant had previously temporarily located to an apartment in an adjoining building so that prior landlord could complete necessary repairs to her apartment. A 2008 agreement signed by tenant and prior landlord in court stated that tenant would be permitted to return to her apartment after repairs were completed, within 60 days. Tenant retained keys to her apartment and left personal items there. The repairs weren’t completed within 60 days and the building fell into foreclosure. New landlord bought the building, changed the locks and claimed that tenant’s 2010 lawsuit was untimely. The court ruled for tenant and found that landlord wasn’t entitled to set a first rent or to charge tenant individual apartment improvement (IAI) rent increases.

Landlord appealed and won, in part. Tenant’s claim wasn’t time-barred. Although a one-year time limit applies to claims for wrongful eviction, the one-year limit didn’t apply to tenant’s case because the claim didn’t accrue until it was reasonably certain that tenant had been unequivocally removed with the implicit denial of any right to return. This didn’t happen until after landlord bought the building in 2010 and changed the apartment locks. Prior landlord had told tenant that she could move back in when repairs were completed, even after the 60 days had passed. However, the appeals court deleted the findings that landlord wasn’t entitled to a first rent or to an IAI rent increase because the Civil Court didn’t have the authority to determine these matters. It could rule only on tenant’s right to possession of the apartment.

 

 

 
Parker v. Howard Avenue Realty, LLC: 2017 N.Y. Slip Op. 27149, 2017 WL 1821943 (App. T. 2 Dept.; 4/28/17; Pesce, PJ, Weston, Aliotta, JJ)