Occupied Apartment in Rehabilitated Building

Tenant complained that landlord wouldn't offer her a renewal lease. Landlord claimed that the building had been substantially rehabilitated and that tenant was, therefore, no longer rent-stabilized. Tenant had lived in the building before the work began and stayed there throughout, except for a brief period when repairs were made in her apartment. The DRA found that the building wasn't substantially rehabilitated to the extent required to exempt it from stabilization, and ordered landlord to give tenant a renewal lease. Landlord appealed. The DHCR ruled against landlord. Even if the rest of the building had been substantially rehabilitated, tenant's apartment would stay rent-stabilized as long as tenant lived there. Very little renovation was done to tenant's apartment. And the purpose of the rent stabilization law is to protect tenants in such situations. For example, tenant would also remain stabilized in a building where the number of apartments was reduced from six to five while she lived there---even if the rest of the building became exempt.

136 West 11th Street, Apt. 2: DHCR Adm. Rev. Dckt. No. GE 410260-RO (10/15/93) [24-page document]