Hearing Required on Mailing Issue in High-Rent/High-Income Deregulation Case

Facts: In 1996, landlord applied for highrent/high-income deregulation of tenant's rent-stabilized apartment. The DRA sent tenant notice of landlord's petition but never received from tenant the income verification form that tenant was required to submit within 60 days. Based on this, the DRA ruled for landlord. Tenant appealed, claiming that he'd mailed the income verification form to the DRA on time. Tenant also claimed that his annual household income for 1994 and 1995 was less than $250,000. The DHCR asked tenant to submit proof of mailing. Tenant submitted several letters and one sworn statement in which he claimed he'd mailed the form on June 25, 1996, within the 60 day time limit. The DHCR ruled against tenant. Tenant appealed, claiming that the DHCR's procedures were arbitrary and unreasonable. Court: Tenant wins. In response to tenant's PAR, the DHCR asked tenant to submit proof of timely mailing, ''such as an official Postal Service Receipt for Certified Mail, or a Certificate of Mailing.'' But instructions on the income verification form stated only that tenant could send the form ''by regular, certified or registered mail.'' It was unfair for the DHCR to require a specific form of proof of mailing from tenant when It didn't notify tenant in advance that tenant would be required to provide a specific type of proof. The case was sent back to the DHCR for further consideration of whether tenant had proved that he mailed the income verification form on time.

Alshooler v. DHCR: NYLJ, p. 26, col. 2 (11/12/98) (Sup. Ct NY; Leo, J)