HSTPA Rent Overcharge Provisions Didn't Apply to Complaint

LVT Number: #31667

Rent-stabilized tenant complained of rent overcharge. The DRA ruled for tenant prior to HSTPA enactment and ordered landlord to refund $15,259, including interest and triple damages. Tenant appealed, claiming that there had been a fraudulent scheme to deregulate the apartment before the four-year base date. The DHCR ruled against tenant, who then filed an Article 78 court appeal. The case was sent back to the DHCR in November 2019, in order for the DHCR to apply HSTPA amendments on rent overcharge matters to the case.

Rent-stabilized tenant complained of rent overcharge. The DRA ruled for tenant prior to HSTPA enactment and ordered landlord to refund $15,259, including interest and triple damages. Tenant appealed, claiming that there had been a fraudulent scheme to deregulate the apartment before the four-year base date. The DHCR ruled against tenant, who then filed an Article 78 court appeal. The case was sent back to the DHCR in November 2019, in order for the DHCR to apply HSTPA amendments on rent overcharge matters to the case. However, while the remanded case was pending before the DHCR, New York's highest court ruled in the April 2020 decision in Regina Metro. v. DHCR that HSTPA didn't apply to overcharge claims filed before June 14, 2019. So, HSTPA didn't apply to tenant's case and tenant's PAR was denied.

Teore: DHCR Adm. Rev. Docket No. JR210003RP (8/10/21)[2-pg. document]

Downloads

31667.pdf78 KB