DHCR Delay Harmed Landlord

August 31, 1999

LVT Number: 13513

Tenant complained of a rent overcharge. The DHCR ruled for tenant, and landlord appealed. The court ruled for landlord and revoked the overcharge finding. The DHCR then appealed and won, in part. Under the overcharge order, tenant's rent was frozen for an extended period. But the reason the rent was frozen for so long was that the DHCR took over 10 years to decide the case. This was unfair to landlord. The case was sent back to the DHCR for recalculation of the rent overcharge, but with the instruction that tenant's rent be frozen only until January 1985.

Tenant complained of a rent overcharge. The DHCR ruled for tenant, and landlord appealed. The court ruled for landlord and revoked the overcharge finding. The DHCR then appealed and won, in part. Under the overcharge order, tenant's rent was frozen for an extended period. But the reason the rent was frozen for so long was that the DHCR took over 10 years to decide the case. This was unfair to landlord. The case was sent back to the DHCR for recalculation of the rent overcharge, but with the instruction that tenant's rent be frozen only until January 1985. Beyond that date, lawful rent increases should be calculated.

Lukin v. DHCR: NYLJ, p. 22, col. 1 (8/24/99) (App. Div.1 Dept.; Ellerin, PJ, Rosenberger, Buckley, Friedman, JJ)

Topics

More like this