Tenant Claims Fraud in Connection with Overcharge Claim

Tenant sued landlord for rent overcharge in Civil Court. The court referred the overcharge claims to the DHCR and otherwise marked the case off calendar pending the DHCR's determination. Tenant appealed, claiming that the court should decide his claim. The appeals court ruled for tenant. The DHCR itself had properly declined in a 2009 agency order to "assume jurisdiction" over tenant's overcharge claims. The DHCR ruling was upheld by State Supreme Court when landlord filed an Article 78 petition appealing that order. The Civil Court then took up the rent overcharge claims. Tenant and landlord both asked the court to rule without a trial. The court refused. There were questions of fact that required a trial, including whether prior landlord engaged in a fraudulent scheme to deregulate tenant's apartment as well as the rest of the building. Prior landlord had claimed that the building was substantially rehabilitated and treated tenants as exempt from rent stabilization. There were also questions as to how much rent tenant actually paid during the periods in questions.