EPTA §5(11) is not inconsistent with the notice provision set forth in ETPR
§2503.5(a). See Crow v. 83rd St. Assocs., 68 NY2d 796, 498 N.E.2d 422, 506
N.Y.S.2d 858 (1986). They are separate and distinct notices that are respectively mandated by the
ETPA and the ETPR. There is nothing contained in ETPA or the ETPR that invalidates the
landlord's obligation to timely provide each requisite notice to the Respondent.
In the case at bar, it is undisputed that Petitioner was aware that it was required to send a
written notice of the termination of the parties' Lease by certified mail to Respondent, not more
than 120 days and not less than 90 days prior to the end of Respondent's lease term. This is
evidenced in the third paragraph of Petitioner's July 30, 2018 Notice where Petitioner referenced
a window period in which Petitioner was required to notify Respondent of the termination date of
the parties' lease. (See Exhibit 'A').
Consequently, as Petitioner failed to comply with ETPR §2503.5(a) and notify
Respondent of the termination date of the parties' lease not more than 120 days and not less than
90 days prior to the end of Respondent's September 30, 2018 lease term, the Petition must be
dismissed as a matter of law and Respondent be provided with a lease renewal in accordance
with ETPA §10(a) and ETPR §2505(a)(b) and (c)."
Petitioner counters that the 90-120 day's notice requirements do not apply to apartments
covered by the ETPR in Nassau County:
"Although Petition [sic] had sent prior notices in July 2018 (i.e. months
before the September 30, 2018 lease expiration), none of those were required as a predicate to
commence the action. Indeed, while there is a requirement to serve a notice between 90-150 days