---

Posted by Mary Monaghan on April 22, 1998 at 12:52:03:

In June 1996 the members of The Surfside Housing Assoc.for Tenants (S.H.A.F.T.) were granted a Rent Reduction by the D.H.C.R. for loss of services. It was retroactive to March 1995. The landlord promptly submitted an appeal for reversal of the order which was subsequently denied by the DHCR. For almost two years our tenants have been paying a reduced rent ranging anywhere from $40 - $90 per month and were told by the DHCR that we could expect the retroactive monies to be forthcoming.
Our landlord has filed an Article 78 claiming that the rent reduction should not have been approved in the first place. While waiting for that case to come to court (April 28) our landlord was able to get a State Supreme Court judge to rule that the tenants have to pay all the monies they received from the Rent Reduction into an Escrow account held by the landlord's attorney.
For two years we were told by the DHCR that this was our money and ,especially once the reversal was denied, that we would not have to pay this back. The tenants simply do not have the $1500.00 or so that we are now being told is not ours.
We are in the process of fighting this court order and are looking for the DHCR to stand up for it's decision.

Follow Ups:

• Re: Rockaway Tenants in trouble TenantNet 5/09/98 (0)

---

Note: Posting is disabled in all archives
Post a Followup

Name    : 
E-Mail  : 
Subject : 

Comments:
: In June 1996 the members of The Surfside Housing Assoc.for Tenants (S.H.A.F.T.) were granted a Rent Reduction by the D.H.C.R. for loss of services. It was retroactive to March 1995. The landlord promptly submitted an appeal for reversal of the order which was subsequently denied by the DHCR. For almost two years our tenants have been paying a reduced rent ranging anywhere from $40 - $90 per month and were told by the DHCR that we could expect the retroactive monies to be forthcoming.
: Our landlord has filed an Article 78 claiming that the rent reduction should not have been approved in the first place. While waiting for that case to come to court (April 28) our landlord was able to get a State Supreme Court judge to rule that the tenants have to pay all the monies they received from the Rent Reduction into an Escrow account held by the landlord's attorney.
: For two years we were told by the DHCR that this was our money and ,especially once the reversal was denied, that we would not have to pay this back. The tenants simply do not have the $1500.00 or so that we are now being told is not ours.
: We are in the process of fighting this court order and are looking for the DHCR to stand up for it's decision.
:  


Optional Link URL:  
Link Title:         
Optional Image URL: 

---