Outstanding Rent Reduction Order Isn't Proof of Landlord Fraud

LVT Number: #26102

Rent-stabilized tenant complained of rent overcharge. The DRA ruled against tenant, finding no overcharge. Tenant appealed and lost. Tenant claimed that his initial lease was illegal because it was for a term of two years and five months, that landlord filed late rent registrations, and that landlord committed fraud by failing to make repairs or seek rent restoration in connection with a rent reduction order made effective March 1, 2009. Tenant also claimed landlord fraud in connection with an eviction proceeding landlord commenced against tenant.

Rent-stabilized tenant complained of rent overcharge. The DRA ruled against tenant, finding no overcharge. Tenant appealed and lost. Tenant claimed that his initial lease was illegal because it was for a term of two years and five months, that landlord filed late rent registrations, and that landlord committed fraud by failing to make repairs or seek rent restoration in connection with a rent reduction order made effective March 1, 2009. Tenant also claimed landlord fraud in connection with an eviction proceeding landlord commenced against tenant. But landlord had filed all missing registrations and had in fact registered rents at less than the legal rents. The two-year/five-month lease was issued as part of a court settlement. Tenant can't raise claims of fraud in connection with a housing court proceeding before the DHCR. And there was no proof that landlord behaved in any fraudulent or willfully illegal manner, or that landlord engaged in a fraudulent scheme to deregulate the apartment. Tenant's monthly rent remained frozen at $550 per month until the DHCR issued a rent restoration order. 

Gassab: DHCR Adm. Rev. Docket No. CR310019RT (2/10/15) [4-pg. doc.]

Downloads

CR310019RT.pdf1.75 MB