DRA Order Not Sent to Landlord's Attorney

Landlord applied for high-rent/high-income deregulation of tenants' rent-stabilized apartment in 2008. The DRA ruled against landlord after DTF found no tax match verifying tenants' income. Landlord appealed, and the case was reopened for reconsideration. The DRA was then able to obtain tax information from DTF, which showed that tenants' total annual household income was below the deregulation threshold in both 2006 and 2007. Landlord again appealed, claiming that tenants' income was higher. Tenants argued that landlord's PAR was untimely. The DHCR considered landlord's PAR because the DRA's order wasn't properly served on landlord's attorney, even though landlord had notified the agency that she was represented by an attorney. But the DHCR ruled against landlord since the DTF records showed that tenants weren't subject to luxury deregulation.

Friedman: DHCR Adm. Rev. Docket No. AW410022RO (6/27/14) [3-pg. doc.]