Landlord Can't Explain Why Tenants Were Treated as Rent Stabilized After Claimed Sub Rehab

Landlord asked the DHCR for a ruling that its building was exempt from rent stabilization due to substantial rehabilitation. The DRA ruled against landlord, after landlord failed to submit requested leases, renewal leases, and preferential lease riders for all building tenants registered as rent-stabilized with the DHCR from 2012 to 2021.

Landlord appealed and lost. Landlord claimed that the requested leases were irrelevant and that work qualifying as a sub rehab had been performed to the vacant, substandard building in 2011. But the requested lease records were essential to a determination of the building's status. They could provide information as to the status of the work over the period between 2011 and 2021 if a reason was given to explain the preferential rents. Also, since landlord treated tenants as rent stabilized from 2011 through 2021, the leases requested could provide additional information as to why. The requested leases and riders also could help ascertain the actual date of completion of the alleged substantial rehabilitation and could help determine whether the work was part of a single action or plan rather than a series of upgrades. The lease records also could help determine whether tenants in occupancy before completion of the sub rehab were entitled to continued rent stabilization protection. 

8th Avenue Holdings LLC: DHCR Adm. Rev. Docket No. KV410016RO (1/31/23)[4-pg. document]