Court Must Re-examine Whether Building Was Substantially Rehabilitated

Landlord sued to evict tenants, claiming that their building was exempt from rent stabilization due to substantial rehabilitation of the building after Jan. 1, 1974. The court ruled for landlord without a trial. Tenants appealed, and the case was reopened. Landlord didn't prove that at least 75 percent of the building-wide and apartment systems had been totally replaced. This was required by DHCR Operational Bulletin 95-2. Landlord owned the building in the 1980s, when the work was supposedly performed, and claimed to have kept no proof of the rehabilitation such as invoices, receipts, or photographs. Landlord relied on documents in DOB files. Landlord's contractor also claimed to have no records or independent recollection of the work. And there were questions of fact requiring a trial, such as whether windows, doors, electrical wiring, gas supply, and intercoms were totally replaced. Although Operational Bulletin 95-2 allowed for relaxed document production requirements for rehab work done before this bulletin was issued, landlord still needed to prove that substantial rehabilitation had taken place.

WFCC Realty Corp.. v. Zhen: 59 Misc.2d 140(A), 2018 NY Slip Op 50620(U) (App. T. 1 Dept.; 4/25/18; Gonzalez, JP, Cooper, Edmead, JJ)