We use cookies to provide you with a better experience. By continuing to browse the site you are agreeing to our use of cookies in accordance with our Cookie Policy.
MCI Increase Granted for New Garage Roof that Doubled as Courtyard
Landlord applied for MCI rent hikes based on the installation of a new garage roof that functioned as a courtyard. The DRA ruled for landlord but disallowed the costs of the garage walls and interior, foundation walls, slabs, beams, columns, permits, engineering, and miscellaneous costs. Landlord and tenant both appealed and lost. Tenants objected to an MCI increase for the garage roof. But the garage was attached to, and formed an extension of, the building.
The NY Attorney General sued landlord and sought an injunction barring landlord from not accepting federal housing subsidized vouchers as a form of rent. The AG claimed that landlord’s refusal to accept the vouchers violated the town of West Seneca’s fair housing code, which prohibited discrimination based on income source. The court granted landlord’s request to dismiss the case and vacated the injunction.
Rent-Stabilized Tenant Can’t Add Son to Parking Space Lease
Rent-stabilized tenant filed a lease violation complaint. Tenant claimed that landlord refused to offer a renewal lease for parking spaces on the same terms and conditions as contained in the expiring parking space leases. Tenant also claimed her son should be added to the parking space leases. The DRA ruled for tenant, finding that landlord never answered the complaint. Landlord appealed and won, in part. Landlord showed by mailing receipts that it had, in fact, answered the complaint.
Landlord Held in Contempt with Daily Fines for Lead Paint Violations
Tenant sued landlord, seeking correction of Housing Maintenance Code violations. The court directed landlord to cure lead paint violations in the apartment, where tenant lived with a child under the age of 7. Tenant later asked the court to hold landlord in contempt because the condition hadn’t been cured. The court ruled for tenant. Landlord hadn’t completed abatement of the lead paint conditions in the time allowed to correct conditions.
Tenant Cured Lease Violation by Getting Rid of Two Pit Bulls
Landlord sued to evict tenant for keeping pit bull dogs in her apartment without landlord’s permission. The court ruled for landlord based on tenant’s failure to appear in court. The court later denied tenant’s request to vacate the default, since tenant didn’t deny harboring the dogs, and gave tenant 10 days to cure in order to avoid eviction. Tenant later asked the court to permanently stay the eviction warrant because she had removed the dogs.
Parking Area Wasn’t Commercial Space for MCI Purposes
Landlord applied for MCI rent hikes based on installation of a new roof, facade and parapet restoration, bulkhead and entrance doors, intercoms, and related architectural fees. The DRA ruled for landlord but set the effective date of the MCI rent hike as Jan. 1, 2013, after finding that this was the first rent payment date after landlord submitted additional required information regarding the building’s commercial space.
Tenant Didn’t Prove Dog Was Emotional Support Animal
Landlord sued to evict tenant for keeping a dog in her apartment, in violation of a no-pet clause in tenant's lease. Tenant claimed that the dog was an emotional support animal needed for her to enjoy her use of her apartment. So, tenant argued, landlord must provide a reasonable accommodation for her disability under the New York State Human Rights Law.
Lawsuit to Stop Publication of City’s Worst Landlords List Dismissed
Two landlords sued New York City’s Public Advocate for damages and asked the court to stop the Advocate from publishing the city’s watchlist of 100 worst landlords. The city had published the watchlist in 2015 and 2016 and listed landlords’ names. Landlords claimed that the publication denied them due process and was defamatory.
Tenants brought an HP proceeding against landlord, seeking correction of building violations and also claiming harassment by landlord. Landlord and tenants signed a consent order to correct violations, and a trial was set to examine the harassment claim. Landlord then asked the court to dismiss the harassment claim without a trial and argued that tenant’s court papers contained no statement of facts to support the harassment claim. Landlord therefore couldn’t defend itself against these claims.
RSS