Intercom Worked But Had Been Modified Without Prior DHCR Approval

In October 2020, some rent-stabilized tenants at a building complex complained to the DHCR about a reduction in building-wide services. In March 2021, the DHCR's inspector found that most services listed in the complaint were maintained, including the entrance doorgate, security cameras, and security guards. The inspector also found that the intercom system was operable and that it was a new wireless system operated with the tenants' personal phones. But landlord hadn't sought or obtained permission from the DHCR to change from a traditional system to the telephone-based intercom system. So the DRA issued a rent reduction order based on the intercom system. Landlord appealed, and some tenants filed PARs.

The DHCR ruled against both sides after conducting an additional inspection in June 2022.  Landlord then filed an Article 78 court appeal, claiming that the DHCR's decision was arbitrary and unreasonable.

The court ruled against landlord. The DHCR reasonably relied on two detailed inspections for its conclusion that landlord upgraded the intercom system without first obtaining the required approval and that the intercom wasn't working for at least one of the apartments. Although landlord disagreed with the inspector's findings, it didn't submit anything to show that the DHCR's conclusions were irrational. 

Riverton Sq. LLC v. DHCR: Index No. 159806/2022, 2023 NY Slip Op 34475(U)(Sup. Ct. NY; 12/20/23; Bluth, J)