DOB Not Responsible for Tenants’ Discrimination Claims Against Landlord Over Elevator Repairs

Tenants and NYC’s Public Advocate Letitia James sued landlord of four Bronx buildings and DOB for disability and housing discrimination due to landlord’s failure to keep elevators running during city-permitted replacement or repairs. They claimed that landlord ran a sustained campaign to discriminate against disabled, elderly, and low-income tenants ultimately to force them out of their rent-stabilized apartments. DOB asked the court to dismiss the case against the agency.

The court ruled for DOB, finding that DOB didn’t enable long delays by landlord, and that landlord’s actions can’t be imputed to the city. Tenants failed to state a claim against DOB because they hadn’t been denied the opportunity to participate in or benefit from DOB’s services, programs, or activities. In this case, the issuance of a building permit or construction permit wasn’t a service, program, or activity provided to tenants within the meaning of the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA). The court also found that the NYC Public Advocate didn’t have standing to sue DOB under the Fair Housing Act or the ADA over landlords’ actions. In addition, the intent of the city’s Construction Codes is to set minimum standards and requirements for building construction as well as to incorporate scientific and engineering knowledge, and consideration of cost, into the regulation of building and construction. Accessibility wasn’t expressly mentioned. 

Picaro v. Pelham 1130: Index No. 14-CV-7398, NYLJ No. 1202754588779 (SDNY; 3/31/16; Batts, DJ)