DHCR Already Decided that Apartment Was Exempt

April 30, 2004

LVT Number: 17327

(Decision submitted by Terry L. Hazen of the Manhattan law firm of Mitofsky Shapiro Neville & Hazen, LLP, attorneys for the landlord.) Landlord sued to evict tenant for nonpayment of rent. Tenant claimed that she was rent stabilized and that she was being overcharged. The court ruled for landlord. Tenant appealed and lost. The DHCR had previously ruled that the apartment was exempt from regulation because it became vacant after June 1997 with a legal regulated rent of $2,000 or more. This rent was based in part on apartment improvements costing $32,000.

(Decision submitted by Terry L. Hazen of the Manhattan law firm of Mitofsky Shapiro Neville & Hazen, LLP, attorneys for the landlord.) Landlord sued to evict tenant for nonpayment of rent. Tenant claimed that she was rent stabilized and that she was being overcharged. The court ruled for landlord. Tenant appealed and lost. The DHCR had previously ruled that the apartment was exempt from regulation because it became vacant after June 1997 with a legal regulated rent of $2,000 or more. This rent was based in part on apartment improvements costing $32,000. The DHCR had approved the 1/40th cost of these improvements in calculating the rent. Tenant claimed that the cost of the improvements was excessive. But tenant didn't appeal the DHCR's deregulation decision and can't attack it indirectly in the nonpayment case.

London Terrace Gardens v. Grabina: NYLJ, 4/28/04, p. 24, col. 3 (App. T. 1 Dept.; McCooe, JP, Davis, Schoenfeld, JJ)

Topics

More like this