Posted by chelsea on May 31, 2001 at 17:11:36:
In Reply to: Landlords May Cut Rent Temporarily posted by nyhawk on May 31, 2001 at 06:35:35:
Does anyone have the text of the full decision?
The article says in a couple of places that the court ruled that the landlord can charge "market rent," which seems implausible. In other places, it refers to legal regulated rent, which is more likely. Either the reporter is confused, or the judges went really wacko. Either way, it's a very negative ruling for tenants, encouraging landlords to charge a so-called preferential rent and register an imaginary "legal" rent, knowing full well that the tenant who is charged the "preferential" rent is unlikely to challenge a rent that he or she isn't paying, until it's too late. I.e., the landlord can charge the preferential rent for four years, then hit the tenant with a big increase based on the "legal" rent, which the tenant cannot challenge after the fact because of the four-year rule.
I know of a group of buildings where every single tenant was being charged "preferential" rent for every lease for 12 or 15 years, which is clearly an attempt to circumvent the rent regulation, rather than any sort of preference. Until the landlord simply stopped registering at all.
This is another reason why it's important for all stabilized tenants to be checking their rent histories. If the legal rent is wrong, even if the tenant is being charged a "preferential" rent, the tenant should challenge the legal rent.
Note: Posting is disabled in all archives
Post a Followup