Skip to main content
DRAFT FOR ATTORNEY REVIEW — NOT FINAL

Matter of Regina Metro. Co., LLC v. New York State Div. of Hous. & Community Renewal, 2018 NY Slip Op 5797 (2018)

Citation
Matter of Regina Metro. Co., LLC v. New York State Div. of Hous. & Community Renewal, 2018 NY Slip Op 5797 (2018)
Parent Document
Matter of Regina Metro. Co., LLC v. New York State Div. of Hous. & Community Renewal, 2018 NY Slip Op 5797 (2018)
Jurisdiction
New York (state)
Effective Date
2018-08-16

Other Sections in This Document (82)

Full Text

1,193 chars
We acknowledge that there is no evidence here of a fraudulent scheme to deregulate the apartment, leading the majority to embrace the landlord's argument that strict application of the four year statute of limitations is required. Although the market rents in Roberts overcharge cases are not tainted by fraud, or some fraudulent scheme, they are, nonetheless, clearly incorrect under rent regulation. The last rent publicly filed with the DHCR is a reliable starting place to calculate the rent that could have been charged but for the improper deregulation. The filed rent should then be adjusted for allowable rent-stabilized increases to reliably determine the regulated rent that should have been filed for the apartment four years preceding the filing of any rent overcharge complaint. The tenants were legally entitled to a rent-regulated lease for the apartment when they rented it in 2005, not a free market, unregulated lease. Although they accepted a free market lease, it is beyond cavil that they did not, nor could they, waive the protections of the of the rent stabilization laws, unless the landlord satisfied the conditions for such deregulation (see Gersten, 88 AD3d at 199).