Skip to main content
DRAFT FOR ATTORNEY REVIEW — NOT FINAL

Aras v. B-U Realty Corp., 2023 NY Slip Op 04917 (2023)

Citation
Aras v. B-U Realty Corp., 2023 NY Slip Op 04917 (2023)
Parent Document
Aras v. B-U Realty Corp., 2023 NY Slip Op 04917 (2023)
Jurisdiction
New York (state)
Effective Date
2023-10-03

Other Sections in This Document (169)

Full Text

1,524 chars
"[I]n Thornton (5 NY3d 175 [2005]), [] we held that a lease provision purporting to exempt an apartment from the Rent Stabilization Law in exchange for an agreement not to use the apartment as a primary residence was void as against public policy (see id. at 179-180). Our ruling was made in connection with a scheme between a landlord and an illusory tenant to agree that an apartment would not be used as the named tenant's primary residence, resulting in the elimination of the rent-stabilized status of the apartment. Acknowledging that the apartment's prior rental history could not be examined, and that the stabilized rent before the fraudulent scheme was of no relevance, we nonetheless rejected the owner's contention that "the legal regulated rent should be established by simple reference to the rental history" on the date four [*19]years prior to the commencement of the overcharge action (id. at 180-181). We explained that the lease was "void at its inception" because its "circumvent[ion of] the Rent Stabilization Law" violated public policy (id. at 181). As a result, the rent registration statement in effect on the base date "listing this illegal rent was also a nullity" (id.). Rather than using the registration statement to ascertain the rent on the base date, we instructed DHCR to use the so-called default formula to calculate the rent on the base date, as it does when no reliable records are available (see id.; see also Levinson v 390 W. End Assoc., LLC., 22 AD3d 397, 400-401 [1st Dept 2005])."