Landlord's Miscalculation of MCI Rent Hike Results in Triple Damages

LVT Number: #33230

Rent-stabilized tenant who had lived in her apartment since 1985 complained to the DHCR of rent overcharge in 2017. She claimed that landlord was seeking to increase her rent by more than the permissible 6 percent increase annually since June 11, 2015, in the collection of an MCI rent increase. The DRA ruled for tenant, finding some error in landlord's calculation and also finding that tenant's rent was frozen due to two outstanding DHCR rent reduction orders. The total overcharge, including triple damages, was $2,798.

Rent-stabilized tenant who had lived in her apartment since 1985 complained to the DHCR of rent overcharge in 2017. She claimed that landlord was seeking to increase her rent by more than the permissible 6 percent increase annually since June 11, 2015, in the collection of an MCI rent increase. The DRA ruled for tenant, finding some error in landlord's calculation and also finding that tenant's rent was frozen due to two outstanding DHCR rent reduction orders. The total overcharge, including triple damages, was $2,798.

Landlord appealed and won, in part. Landlord argued that the DRA incorrectly applied the two rent decreases to the collectible rent when they directed a decrease of the legal rent. The DHCR ruled for landlord in part. As specified in MCI modification orders resulting from J-51 tax benefits also received by landlord for its MCIs, the maximum collectible rent, not the legal regulated rent, was subject to the lawful MCI rent increase. So the DRA's calculation of the collectible rent, which ultimately was frozen by the rent reduction orders, was correct. However, the DRA's order also contained a typographical error in its numbers. The total overcharge was slightly lower than originally calculated.

1005 Yankee Pride LLC: DHCR Adm. Rev. Docket No. LX610010 RO (5/14/24)[3-pg. document]

Downloads

33230.pdf193.44 KB