Tenant Didn't Answer Deregulation Application on Time

LVT Number: 17069

(Decision submitted by Terry L. Hazen of the Manhattan law firm of Mitofsky Shapiro Neville & Hazen, LLP, attorneys for the landlord.) Landlord applied for high-rent/high-income deregulation of tenant's apartment in 2003. Tenant didn't answer the DHCR's notice of landlord's application. The DRA ruled for landlord based on tenant's default. Tenant appealed, claiming that she was having business problems at the time she got the notice and didn't realize she had to answer within 60 days. The DHCR ruled against tenant. Tenant admitted getting notice of landlord's application.

(Decision submitted by Terry L. Hazen of the Manhattan law firm of Mitofsky Shapiro Neville & Hazen, LLP, attorneys for the landlord.) Landlord applied for high-rent/high-income deregulation of tenant's apartment in 2003. Tenant didn't answer the DHCR's notice of landlord's application. The DRA ruled for landlord based on tenant's default. Tenant appealed, claiming that she was having business problems at the time she got the notice and didn't realize she had to answer within 60 days. The DHCR ruled against tenant. Tenant admitted getting notice of landlord's application. The notice pointed out that, by law, tenant must answer within 60 days. Tenant didn't present a good excuse for not answering the application. Her apartment would be deregulated at the end of her current lease.

Sotomayor: DHCR Adm. Rev. Dckt. No. RJ410033RT (11/24/03) [3-pg. doc.]

Downloads

RJ410033RT.pdf230.46 KB