Tenant Claims Improper Deregulation of Apartment

LVT Number: #25856

Tenant asked the DHCR to determine whether her apartment had been properly deregulated. Landlord pointed out that rent registration records showed that a prior rent-stabilized tenant whose lease expired on March 31, 2006, had a legal regulated rent of $1,902. The next tenant had a vacancy lease commencing Oct. 10, 2008, at a monthly deregulated rent of $2,400. Landlord had bought the building in 2013 and didn't have leases for the period between April 2006 and 2008. Also, no exit registration was filed.

Tenant asked the DHCR to determine whether her apartment had been properly deregulated. Landlord pointed out that rent registration records showed that a prior rent-stabilized tenant whose lease expired on March 31, 2006, had a legal regulated rent of $1,902. The next tenant had a vacancy lease commencing Oct. 10, 2008, at a monthly deregulated rent of $2,400. Landlord had bought the building in 2013 and didn't have leases for the period between April 2006 and 2008. Also, no exit registration was filed. The DRA ruled against tenant, who appealed because she wasn't given the opportunity to review or respond to landlord's answer. The DHCR ruled for tenant and reopened the case. Rent Stabilization Code Section 2527.3(a)(1) required notice to tenant with a copy of landlord's answer. Tenant must be given a chance to respond.

 

Wisneski: DHCR Adm. Rev. Docket No. CQ410045RT (9/19/14) [3-pg. doc.]

Downloads

CQ410045RT.pdf1.14 MB