MCR Set Based on Equities

LVT Number: 18914

(Decision submitted by James R. Marino of the Manhattan law firm of Kucker & Bruh, LLP, attorneys for the landlord.) Landlord asked the DHCR to determine that tenant was rent stabilized. Tenant claimed she was rent controlled. Landlord pointed out that tenant had been signing rent-stabilized renewal leases without objection for 20 years. Tenant pointed to a 2003 DHCR Report of Maximum Rent stating that the MCR was $163.76 as of Jan. 1, 1981. The DRA ruled for tenant, but based on the equities involved, set her rent at $502.69. Tenant appealed and lost.

(Decision submitted by James R. Marino of the Manhattan law firm of Kucker & Bruh, LLP, attorneys for the landlord.) Landlord asked the DHCR to determine that tenant was rent stabilized. Tenant claimed she was rent controlled. Landlord pointed out that tenant had been signing rent-stabilized renewal leases without objection for 20 years. Tenant pointed to a 2003 DHCR Report of Maximum Rent stating that the MCR was $163.76 as of Jan. 1, 1981. The DRA ruled for tenant, but based on the equities involved, set her rent at $502.69. Tenant appealed and lost. There was a legitimate dispute as to whether tenant was rent controlled or rent stabilized. It was fair to set the current rent by adding MBR increases that could have been applied over the years if tenant's apartment had been treated as rent controlled.

Jones: DHCR Adm. Rev. Dckt. No. TF420135RT (4/26/06) [5-pg. doc.]

Downloads

TF420135RT.pdf383.13 KB