Tenants to Return to Court Jan. 25 to Challenge Rent-Code Changes

By Dave Powell

On Dec. 10, over 60 tenants and their allies showed up at Brooklyn Criminal Court to support a lawsuit challenging recent changes to the state’s Rent Stabilization Code. A pre-court picket drew close to two dozen tenants, while more waited up to a half-hour in line to get into the building. After getting past the metal detectors and learning that the room for the opening arguments had been changed, tenants were informed that the hearing had been postponed.

Because both sides had submitted last-minute briefs, Judge Richard Rivera postponed opening arguments, so as to have time to adequately review the briefs. Lawyers representing tenants saw the postponement as a positive indication that Rivera was reviewing the merits thoroughly. The tenant picket and presence, called by Met Council, also got the issue some much-needed media attention; Channel 11, WNYC radio, the New York Post, The Daily News and the Brooklyn Papers all dispatched reporters.

The lawsuit, filed by various groups including Met Council, alleges that the state Division of Housing Community Renewal (DHCR) overstepped its authority by making drastic code changes without the approval of the state Legislature, sufficient public input, or impact studies. Although the case is a state Supreme Court case, overcrowding at the Brooklyn Supreme Court building has forced the case to be heard at the neighboring Criminal Court. The change of venue appears to be incidental, but the symbolism of trying Governor George Pataki’s DHCR in Criminal Court is not lost on tenants.

The new code gives landlords unprecedented loopholes for overcharging and removing apartments from rent stabilization, by replacing "legal registered rent" with "legal regulated rent," implying that a rent is whatever the landlord charges, regardless of what is registered with DHCR. Another provision in the new code limits the amount a primary tenant can charge a roommate, to a "proportionate" share of the legal regulated rent, usually 50%. The new restrictions place real hardship on poor, elderly and disabled tenants on fixed incomes, who often rely on roommates to make ends meet. A tenant accepting greater than 50% of the total rent under this provision may face eviction. Another provision in the new code allows landlords to charge "surcharges" for appliances like washing machines or services such as cable hook-ups.

Although the changes were "codified" on Dec. 20, 2000, the DHCR has yet to issue bulletins explaining how they will be implemented. However, individual landlords have been trying out aspects of the new code. One Housing Court judge decided that a tenant who had charged her roommate more than 50% of the legal rent could be evicted, although that case is being appealed.

Other provisions of the new code make it harder for tenants to challenge major capital improvement (MCI) rent increases and to get reductions in rent for reductions in services. (If you are being taken to court or otherwise challenged by your landlord over issues relating to the new code changes, contact Met Council.)

The one-sided and brazen severity of the code changes has led tenant advocates to conclude that they were written with, if not by, lobbyists for the real-estate industry. They represent the latest installment of Gov. Pataki’s career-long assault on rent regulation, and the over 2 million of us whom rely on it for protection. When he was elected governor in 1994, Pataki’s transition platform emphasized his vision for dismantling tenant pro- tections. His subsequent transformation of DHCR, from a sometimes-fair agency to an openly pro-landlord unit, is known by virtually all tenants who have sought its assistance in recent years. Despite Pataki’s 1997 pledge to enact stronger harassment measures against landlords, the new code creates a provision allowing tenants to be evicted for "harassing" their landlords.

Tenants will return to Brooklyn Criminal Court on Friday, Jan. 25. For details, contact Dave Powell at Met Council: (212) 979-6238, ext. 6.