Google Search

TenantNet Forum Archives 1996-2002
Posting and Replies are disabled in all Archives
TenantNet Forum | TenantNet Forum Archives Index

Re: Eviction in Supreme Court

Posted by Pat on June 15, 1999 at 07:36:13:

In Reply to: Re: Eviction in Supreme Court posted by Richard on June 13, 1999 at 15:56:40:

: : That was a scathing message from Richard but your question was could a landlord, who doesn't have the proper registration at the buildings department, etc prevail against you in supreme court, RIGHT?
: : OK, go to the law library at 80 centre street 4th fl.,. To me, it would have to be proof ....

: It may have been a scathing message, your advice is good, but it is an uphill battle, "Your Honor... I didnt know, not having a lease and paying the rent in cash to one of the owner's is wrong!

Let me clear this up. I was told by all of the owners that the bldg. was a co-op and I was subleasing. I had no reason to doubt this because I knew the owners from childhood and everyone believes this is a co-op and that they all own their own apartments. I found out it was not a legal co-op when they raised my rent and I tried to find out my rights by calling Attorney General's office. I paid both rents by check. $163 to the bldg and $437 to the supposed owner of my apartment. I have the cancelled checks. During a dsipute over mice extermination, owner told me legal rent was $163, then they raised it another $100 saying that it was because I got married. When I then questioned legality of bldg. and rent they served me with a 30 day notice. They keep this in court by not serving me papers but leaving them in the hall the night before hearings to try to get me to lose by default. They lie in the papers. In l/t court the summons said I pay $163, live in a two-family bldg. and live on the first floor. I pay $600 (raiised to $700), live in a six-family bldg. and live on the second floor. Now in Supreme Court, the papers say I play $600, still live on the first floor, and was "legally evicted" now owing back rent. I must work and so I am afraid that I will not know about hearing date if I don't keep running to the court to check on the index number. I am having trouble proving the bldg is a six (two bldgs, same block and lot, same water/sewer/same owners etc.. But I have been able to establish it as a multple-dwelling by calling DOB down. They have a 1942 c of o on half of the bldg. claiming it is a 2f with store. Now at least that half has been established as a 3f and it falls under MD laws. There is no MDR number, DHCR will not investigate, nor will anyone else because they keep going by that 1942 c of o. They bought the building in 1979. There is no c of o for the other half of the bldg. How did they buy this bldg with no c of o on the other half of it? I am doing what I can to fight this alone plus continue to research the bldg. My fear is that I will not be notified on time for this hearing, or at all.



Follow Ups:

Note: Posting is disabled in all archives
Post a Followup

Name    : 
E-Mail  : 
Subject : 
Comments: Optional Link URL: Link Title: Optional Image URL:


TenantNet Home | TenantNet Forum | New York Tenant Information | Contact Us
DHCR Information | DHCR Decisions | Housing Court Decisions | New York Rent Laws |

Subscribe to our Mailing List!
Your Email      Full Name