PWV Acquisition, LLC v. Paradise

• Decision Date: 29 March 2018
• Docket Number: 570652/17
• Citation: 100 N.Y.S.3d 611 (Table),59 Misc.3d 130 (A)
• Parties: PWV ACQUISITION, LLC, Petitioner–Landlord–Respondent, v. Michael PARADISE, Respondent–Tenant–Appellant.
• Court: New York Supreme Court — Appellate Term

59 Misc.3d 130 (A)

100 N.Y.S.3d 611 (Table)

PWV ACQUISITION, LLC, Petitioner–Landlord–Respondent,

v.Michael PARADISE, Respondent–Tenant–Appellant.

570652/17

Supreme Court, Appellate Term, New York, FIRST DEPARTMENT.

Decided March 29, 2018

Per Curiam.

Order (John H. Stanley, J.), dated May 3, 2017, reversed, with $10 costs, and tenant's motion granted to the extent of awarding tenant summary judgment dismissing the petition and partial summary judgment on his counterclaims on the issue of liability, and the matter remanded to Civil Court for an assessment to determine the amount of the overcharge, as well as the treble damages to be awarded thereon, and the reasonable value of the attorneys' fees due tenant.

Pursuant to a rent reduction order effective January 1, 2012, DHCR found that the owner failed to provide certain required services and reduced the legal regulated rent for 47 stabilized building units, including the subject apartment, to the level in effect prior to the most recent guideline increase. The order also expressly barred landlord from collecting any rent increases until an order was issued restoring the rent. The legal rent for the subject apartment prior to the most recent guideline increase was $818.71, the amount paid by the stabilized tenant (Wachtel), who vacated in early 2014. Tenant entered into possession of the apartment in June 2014, pursuant to a free market lease setting forth a rent of $3,400 per month. DHCR issued an order restoring the rent effective June 1, 2016.

This March 2016 nonpayment proceeding, based upon allegations that tenant owes rent arrears in excess of $22,000 and that his apartment is exempt from rent stabilization due a high rent vacancy, should have been dismissed on tenant's summary judgment motion. Pursuant to the rent reduction order, the rent was frozen at $818.71 per month when tenant leased the apartment in June 2014 (see Rent Stabilization Law [Administrative Code of City of NY] § 26—514; Rent Stabilization Code [9 NYCRR] § 2523.4[a] [1] ; Jenkins v. Fieldbridge Assoc. , LLC, 65 AD3d 169 [2009], lv dismissed 13 NY3d 855 [2009] ), and pursuant to this order, landlord was not entitled to collect any vacancy increases (see RSC §§ 2523.4[a][1], 2522.8 ) or increases for individual apartment improvement (see RSC § 2522.4[a][1]; DHCR Operational Bulletin 2014–2). Thus, the subject apartment did not become exempt from stabilization due to a high rent vacancy that occurred before tenant entered into possession. Accordingly, the nonpayment petition alleging that the apartment is exempt from coverage must be dismissed. Landlord also concedes that its rent demand is defective.

The record also conclusively establishes that tenant was overcharged,...