Posted by Albert Patrick on August 25, 1997 at 13:29:01:
A holdover proceeding has been brought against me for failing to send my
renewal lease to the landlord within the 60 day window stated in the
rent stabilization code. My contention is that I've handed the lease back
late every year for the last 8 and every year, the landlord has accepted it.
In addition, the law states that a landlord must get the lease back to the
tenant 30 days after receiving it; it took him 4 1/2 months to get it back
this past year. Based on my "course of dealings" with the landlord, I
contend that I should not be evicted because of this since the method of
doing business has been the same every year. Does this make sense? It just
so happens that I pay below market value for my apartment.
In addition, I just found a Supreme Court Appeals case (FAIRBANKS GARDENS
CO v. Subash Gandhi, April 4, 1996) that overturned a previous case which
denied tenant ten-day stay to correct breach of lease. From the opinion -
"it is now our view that the cure period provided by RPAPL 753(4) is
applicable in holdover proceedings based upon a tenant's failure to sign
a renewal lease."
Note: Posting is disabled in all archives
Post a Followup