DHCR's Finding Upheld

December 1, 1997

LVT Number: 11967

Rent-controlled tenant complained of a reduction in services. The DHCR ruled for tenant and reduced his rent. Landlord appealed, claiming that the DHCR's ruling was arbitrary and unreasonable. The court and appeals court ruled against landlord. Landlord had notice of a ``no access'' inspection ordered by the DHCR but ignored it. There was no reason to second-guess the DHCR's evaluation of the reduced rental value of tenant's apartment resulting from the decrease in services. Tenant's complaint gave landlord notice of those conditions for which rent was reduced.

Rent-controlled tenant complained of a reduction in services. The DHCR ruled for tenant and reduced his rent. Landlord appealed, claiming that the DHCR's ruling was arbitrary and unreasonable. The court and appeals court ruled against landlord. Landlord had notice of a ``no access'' inspection ordered by the DHCR but ignored it. There was no reason to second-guess the DHCR's evaluation of the reduced rental value of tenant's apartment resulting from the decrease in services. Tenant's complaint gave landlord notice of those conditions for which rent was reduced. Only one condition, unlevel floors, warranted being sent back to the DHCR for reconsideration. Otherwise, the appeals court upheld the lower court's ruling.

Fran Pearl Equities v. DHCR: NYLJ, p. 27, col. 2 (11/17/97) (App. Div. 1 Dept.; Sullivan, JP, Milonas, Wallach, Williams, Tom, JJ)

Topics

More like this