Tenant's Son Can't Get Mitchell-Lama Apartment

LVT Number: #24714

Tenant's son claimed succession rights to Mitchell-Lama apartment after tenant moved out in December 2004. HPD ruled against the son because he didn't appear on tenant's income affidavit for the calendar year 2004. HPD found that, since the family member failed to prove that the apartment had been his primary residence for two years immediately before tenant vacated, he didn't qualify under HPD rules for succession rights. The son appealed and lost. HPD's decision was rational and reasonable based on the facts and law.

Full Article Access:

Full access to complete articles from Landlord v. Tenant is for subscribers only.

Not yet ready to subscribe?