Wife of Tenant Who Hadn't Permanently Vacated Wasn't Entitled to Renewal Lease

The wife of a rent-stabilized tenant complained in July 2015 that landlord refused to offer her a renewal lease for the apartment. She claimed that tenant hadn't lived in the apartment since September 2013 when police removed him from the apartment. The wife then obtained an order of protection against tenant from the police department, which was set to expire in January 2016. Landlord answered that the husband was the only tenant named on the prior leases and that the wife lacked standing to file a renewal lease complaint. Tenant moved into the apartment in 1992 and married his wife in Pakistan in 1999. Tenant also claimed that he had been divorced from his wife since October 2010, although she didn't recognize the divorce decree. Landlord also had a pending eviction proceeding against tenant, and there was a family court action between tenant and the wife. The DRA ruled that the wife wasn't entitled to a renewal lease but that she could continue to live in the apartment as a family member of tenant's.

Tenant's wife appealed and lost. In a separate DHCR proceeding, the DRA issued an order in May 2017 finding that the husband was the rent-stabilized tenant and directing landlord to issue him a renewal lease. Landlord didn't appeal that decision. And since tenant and his wife were no longer married, the wife could become the named tenant only if she had succession rights. Yet tenant hadn't vacated the apartment. His physical relocation under the order of protection wasn't voluntary or permanent. Tenant also advised the DHCR that he had no intention of permanently vacating the apartment, and he had started a housing court proceeding to regain possession. So, without a valid marriage license or proof that tenant had permanently moved out of the apartment, the wife wasn't entitled to a renewal lease in her name.

Haider: DHCR Adm. Rev. Docket No. FT-410034-RT (1/25/18) [4-pg. doc.]