Tenant Excused Twice for Not Answering Deregulation Application

Landlord applied for high-rent/high-income deregulation of tenant's rent-stabilized apartment in 2008. The DRA ruled for landlord based on tenant's failure to answer the DRA's notices. Tenant then appealed and showed good cause for his default, so the DHCR reopened the proceeding. On remand, the DRA again ruled for landlord based on tenant's failure to respond to a new notice of landlord's application. Tenant appealed again, claiming that he had submitted sufficient information to the DRA to determine that his income was below the deregulation threshold. Tenant, who was 75 years old, also claimed he still suffered from the same medical problems and disabilities as he cited previously, including heart irregularities, diabetes, and glaucoma. The DHCR ruled for tenant and again sent the case back to the DRA for reconsideration. Tenant was represented by an attorney when he filed his first PAR, but the DRA didn't send copies of the new notice of landlord's application to the attorney. And tenant had no prior experience with luxury deregulation proceedings since landlord filed its first application in 2008. Tenant had shown good cause for his failure to answer the DRA's notice of the remanded proceeding, and the case was sent back again to the DRA for re-service of landlord's application on both tenant and his attorney.

Paris: DHCR Adm. Rev. Docket No. AT410029RT (6/27/14) [4-pg. doc.]