Missing DHCR Lease Rider Didn't Preclude Vacancy Deregulation

Tenant complained of rent overcharge and improper apartment deregulation. The DRA ruled against tenant, finding that the unit was exempt from rent stabilization due to high-rent deregulation.

Tenant appealed and lost. Landlord submitted sufficient proof of individual apartment improvements (IAIs) performed at the vacant apartment in 2010 before tenant moved in. At that time, DHCR Policy Statement 90-10 required that IAIs be supported by at least one form of documentation, including contemporaneous cancelled checks, invoices marked "paid in full" contemporaneous with completion of the work, a signed contract, or a contractor's affidavit indicating that the installation was completed and paid in full.

Landlord showed that the IAI work cost $38,000. DHCR inspection also confirmed that kitchen, bathroom, and other work was done, adding up to a substantial renovation. The DRA also had reviewed rent history records going back at least six years, in order to apply a longevity increase claimed by landlord and which contributed to tenant's vacancy rent exceeding the deregulation threshold. The rent registration history also was filed contemporaneously with the annual registration periods. The lack of a DHCR rider with tenant's vacancy lease wasn't fraudulent, especially since landlord proved the required rent needed to deregulate the apartment. The DHCR has never determined that an apartment should be regulated solely based on the absence of its rider.

Sierra: DHCR Adm. Rev. Docket No. HP410007RT (1/7/20) [8-pg. doc.]