HPD Harassment Finding Upheld

November 1, 2003

LVT Number: 16908

Landlord of an SRO applied to HPD for a certificate of no harassment. HPD ruled against landlord. Landlord appealed, claiming that HPD's decision wasn't supported by substantial evidence. The court ruled for landlord, and HPD appealed. The appeals court ruled for HPD. Tenants testified before HPD about deplorable conditions in their living areas, the common bathrooms, and kitchens. They presented substantial proof that landlord either discontinued or interrupted essential services. This was considered harassment under applicable city law.

Landlord of an SRO applied to HPD for a certificate of no harassment. HPD ruled against landlord. Landlord appealed, claiming that HPD's decision wasn't supported by substantial evidence. The court ruled for landlord, and HPD appealed. The appeals court ruled for HPD. Tenants testified before HPD about deplorable conditions in their living areas, the common bathrooms, and kitchens. They presented substantial proof that landlord either discontinued or interrupted essential services. This was considered harassment under applicable city law. Landlord also tried to intimidate one particular tenant into moving out of the building.

235 Hotel LLC v. HPD: NYLJ, 10/16/03, p. 26, col. 5 (App. Div. 1 Dept.; Saxe, JP, Rosenberger, Williams, Lerner, JJ)

Topics

More like this