Can a landlord arbitrarily recharacterize an existing rent reduction agreement that was never stated to be a 'preferential rent' as a 'preferential rent' agreement?
That is, does a 'preferential rent' agreement have to be specifically stated as being a preferential rent agreement at the time it comes into being?
DHCR's definition appears to include any rent reduction under the definition of 'preferential rent,' regardless of whether or not it was stated to be a 'preferential rent' at the time it went into effect (or whether the existing reduction that the landlord now wants to call a 'preferential rent' was ever referred to as a preferential rent previously):
"A preferential rent is a rent which an owner agrees to charge that is lower than the legal regulated rent that the owner could lawfully collect." (Fact Sheet #40)
http://www.nyshcr.org/Rent/factsheets/orafac40.htm
The existing agreement was created in a 'letter of agreement' that simply stated that a permanent rent reduction (as a % of the legal rent) would be in effect.
Rent reduction has been in effect for ten years without the rider. Although the rider has been sent before (at previous renewals), I ignored it. Lease was renewed anyway. This is a new unexplained demand by the landlord.
Also, landlord is justifying by claiming that a preferential lease rider (agreed to & signed by tenant) is required by law when a unit has a preferential rent. Is that true?
Thanks.