NYS DHCR Office of Rent Administration, Overcharge R-PAR Orders (July 1 - Sept 29 2025, Part 2)

The owner answered the PAR, contending that the apartment was temporarily exempt due to
owner occupancy from 1998 through 2004; that the RSC at the time provided that the owner and the
first tenant after such temporary exemption could agree to a first rent; that such first rent, agreed to
on September 1, 2004, and registered in 2005, established the rent at $2,005.00 per month which was
above the $2,000.00 per month threshold for deregulation at that time; that the apartment was
therefore deregulated at that time; that the mistaken registration of the apartment as stabilized in
2005 and 2006 did not make the apartment a stabilized apartment as stabilization is established by
law and cannot be established by error or by act or omission of any party; that the apartment was
a
subsequerttly rented as free market apartment, and was not registered after 2006; thatthe apartment
was treated as a free market apartment at all times after 2006 except for a mistaken filing in 2013 ,
which, again, did not alter the free market status of the apartment; that the tenant 's allegations about
events occurring 20 years ago, without any evidence to support such allegations, does not show fraud
arid does not provide al)y reason to investigate rental events prior to the six year base date in this
case; that the owner registered the apartment as "Exempt Owner Occupied" from 1998-2004, and the
complaint was fi led in 2022; that the statute oflimitations on investigation of rental events (except
when there is fraud , which there is not herein) is to provide repose, to require suits to occur while the
facts are fresh , and to limit record~keeping requirements (citations omitted); that there can be no
fraud when an owner deregulates properly und_er the law in effect at the time of such