Tenant Didn't Prove He Never Got Deregulation Notice

LVT Number: 12485

(Decision submitted by Patti Stone of the Manhattan law firm of Rosenberg & Estis, P.C., attorneys for the landlord.) Landlord applied in 1995 for high-rent/high-income deregulation of tenant's rent-stabilized apartment. The DRA ruled for landlord based on tenant's failure to answer the petition. Tenant appealed, claiming he never received the DHCR's notice of landlord's petition. Tenant argued that the certified mailing receipt in the DHCR's file couldn't prove mailing of the 12-page document the DHCR claimed to have sent tenant since the postage cost was only $1.65.

(Decision submitted by Patti Stone of the Manhattan law firm of Rosenberg & Estis, P.C., attorneys for the landlord.) Landlord applied in 1995 for high-rent/high-income deregulation of tenant's rent-stabilized apartment. The DRA ruled for landlord based on tenant's failure to answer the petition. Tenant appealed, claiming he never received the DHCR's notice of landlord's petition. Tenant argued that the certified mailing receipt in the DHCR's file couldn't prove mailing of the 12-page document the DHCR claimed to have sent tenant since the postage cost was only $1.65. The DHCR ruled against tenant. Tenant's mere denial of receipt of the petition wasn't sufficient proof that the DHCR didn't notify tenant of landlord's petition. And the DHCR's postage cost didn't include ''return receipt requested,'' so the postage amount was explainable.

Anderson: DHCR Adm. Rev. Dckt. No. KH410048RT (3/5/98) [3-page document]

Downloads

KH410048RT.pdf191.81 KB