Rent Demand Didn't Provide Prior Notice of Rent Surcharge

September 24, 2019

LVT Number: #30364

Landlord sued to evict Mitchell-Lama co-op tenant based on nonpayment of rent. Tenant asked the court to dismiss the case, claiming that landlord was time-barred from collecting back rent dating to 2012 under the six-year time limit set forth in CPLR Section 213(2). Landlord argued that the rent arrears accrued much later, in 2018, as a result of an audit showing that there were discrepancies in tenant's income information submitted in 2012. This resulted in a surcharge being assessed.

Landlord sued to evict Mitchell-Lama co-op tenant based on nonpayment of rent. Tenant asked the court to dismiss the case, claiming that landlord was time-barred from collecting back rent dating to 2012 under the six-year time limit set forth in CPLR Section 213(2). Landlord argued that the rent arrears accrued much later, in 2018, as a result of an audit showing that there were discrepancies in tenant's income information submitted in 2012. This resulted in a surcharge being assessed. But landlord was required to send a HUD-required notice to tenant that the maximum surcharge from the 2012 audit would be imposed at least one calendar month before sending a rent demand. Since landlord didn't send the notice, the rent demand was improper and the case was dismissed.

Rochdale Village Inc. v. Blackman: Index No. L&T 56962/19, 2019 NY Slip Op 51426(U) (Civ. Ct. NY; 8/16/19; Guthrie, J)

Topics

More like this