Outcome of Harassment Proceeding Irrelevant

LVT Number: 6802

Half of tenants in an 80-unit building complained of reduced building-wide services. Landlord claimed that the conditions had been repaired, but an inspection showed that 18 of the complained of conditions still existed. The DRA reduced tenants' rents, and landlord appealed. Landlord claimed that the DRA should have waited to decide tenants' service complaint until after the DHCR's enforcement unit had decided tenants' harassment complaint. The enforcement unit had given landlord time to correct the building-wide conditions. The DHCR denied landlord's PAR.

Half of tenants in an 80-unit building complained of reduced building-wide services. Landlord claimed that the conditions had been repaired, but an inspection showed that 18 of the complained of conditions still existed. The DRA reduced tenants' rents, and landlord appealed. Landlord claimed that the DRA should have waited to decide tenants' service complaint until after the DHCR's enforcement unit had decided tenants' harassment complaint. The enforcement unit had given landlord time to correct the building-wide conditions. The DHCR denied landlord's PAR. There is no DHCR policy preventing the DRA from issuing a rent reduction order while an harassment proceeding is pending. The considerations given to and the penalties for the two proceedings are entirely different and unrelated. Also, different tenants were involved in each proceeding

[Hill Top House: DHCR Adm. Rev. Dckt. Nos. FF 630188-RO, EG 630086-B (1/15/93)]. 6-page document.

Downloads

FF630188-RO.pdf320.11 KB