Rent Demands Were Confusing

Landlord sued to evict tenant for nonpayment of rent. Tenant claimed that landlord's rent demands were confusing and asked the court to dismiss the case. The court ruled for tenant. The first rent demand, dated Dec. 22, 2003, stated that tenant owed $6,300 through December 2003. The typed amount claimed for August 2002 was $3,900, but a handwritten note indicated that that amount actually represented 26 months of rent from June 2000 to August 2002 at $150 per month. The second rent demand, dated Jan. 4, 2004, claimed back rent of $8,400. The typed amount claimed for September 2002 was $6,000. Again, a handwritten note indicated that that amount represented 40 months from June 2001 through September 2002 at $150 per month. But the notation was incorrect. The period from June 2001 to September 2002 represented 16 months, and the amount due was $2,400. In court, landlord also went to great lengths to explain the inaccuracies in the rent demand. The rent demands were insufficient to fairly advise tenant of what was owed.

Kelenzon v. Derobertis: NYLJ, 4/21/04, p. 19, col. 3 (Civ. Ct. Kings; Ressos, J)