No Proof of Fraudulent Deregulation

(Decision submitted by Erez Glambosky and Jeremy Honig of the Manhattan law firm of Rivki Radler LLP, attorneys for the landlord.)

Landlord sued to evict month-to-month tenant and claimed that tenant wasn't subject to rent regulation. Tenant claimed that he was rent stabilized and that prior landlord had deregulated the apartment fraudulently in 2003. The court ruled for landlord. The apartment rent was $1,068 in May 2002, then increased to $2,100 under a vacancy lease in November 2003. Tenant moved into the apartment in 2008 and claimed that the unit wasn't renovated. Therefore, tenant argued, there was no basis to increase the rent to more than $2,000 in 2003. This was more than seven years before the four-year look-back period for rent overcharge, and the court could only consider the 2003 rent increase to be illegal if there was proof of a fraudulent deregulation scheme by the landlord. A mere allegation of fraud wasn't enough. Tenant claimed that he had compared his apartment to many other apartments in the building, and his architect submitted an opinion that any improvements made to the apartment cost only $10,000. This was insufficient to indicate fraudulent conduct.

245 Owner LLC v. Yaghoobian: Index No. 87414/2014 (Civ. Ct. NY; 4/3/15; Stoller, J)