No-Pet Clause Valid

Tenant complained that landlord didn't offer her a renewal lease in 1986. Landlord argued that tenant had refused to sign the renewal lease offered. Tenant claimed that she didn't sign because landlord added a no-pet clause to her 1986 renewal lease. This altered the terms of her lease in violation of the Rent Stabilization Code. The DRA ruled against tenant and tenant appealed. The DHCR again ruled for landlord. The Rent Stabilization Code required landlord to offer tenant a renewal lease containing the same terms and conditions as the expiring lease. The ''expiring lease'' was the most recent prior renewal lease, signed in 1983. The 1983 renewal included a no-pet clause. So the no-pet clause contained in the 1986 renewal was valid. And a prior court order finding that landlord had given up the right to enforce the no-pet clause didn't make the lease clause itself invalid. The DHCR noted that the 1986 clause was also less restrictive than the 1983 clause.

Kornbluth: DHCR Adm. Rev. Dckt. No. CB110216RT (1/12/95) [4-page document]