Mitchell-Lama Tenant's Niece Failed to Prove She Had Succession Rights

The niece of a Mitchell-Lama tenant claimed succession rights after tenant died. HPD ruled against the niece after holding a hearing. The niece then filed an Article 78 court appeal of HPD's decision and lost. The co-occupants of Mitchell-Lama tenants aren't automatically entitled to succession rights. Under applicable regulations, they must show that they qualify as family members or were otherwise sufficiently interdependent with the tenant, that they lived in the unit as their primary residence for two years immediately prior to the tenant's vacatur, and that they were listed as co-occupants on tenants' income affidavits filed for the two-year period in question. In this case, HPD's decision was rational. Tenant filed no 2016 income affidavit and the 2018 income affidavit submitted at the hearing was notarized after the tenant had died in September 2018. That income affidavit was dated Aug. 30, 2019. And the niece submitted no documents at the hearing to support her claim that she'd lived in the apartment as her primary residence for at least two years before tenant died.

Siegel v. HPD: Index No. 100480/2022, 2023 NY Slip Op 30317(U)(Sup. Ct. NY; 2/1/23; Bluth, J)