Trial Court Must Determine If Building Was Substantially Rehabbed

Landlord sued to evict tenant, claiming that tenant was unregulated because the building had been substantially rehabilitated in the mid-1980s. The court ruled for landlord without a trial. Tenant appealed, and the case was reopened and sent back to the trial court for further consideration. Further fact-finding was needed. Landlord didn't show that at least 75 percent of the building's systems had been replaced, as required by DHCR Operational Bulletin 95-2. Although the DHCR's 1995 criteria may be relaxed for work done before then, landlord must show through adequate documentation that the work was done. Landlord had relied on public records and, although it owned the building at the time of the substantial rehabilitation, claimed that it didn't have invoices, receipts, or photographs. Landlord's contractor also claimed to have no records or independent recollection of the work.

WFCC Realty Corp. v. Lin: 61 Misc.3d 130(A), 2018 NY Slip Op 51402(U) (App. T. 1 Dept.; 10/4/18; Ling-Cohan, JP, Gonzalez, Cooper, JJ)