Showing 1–19 of 19 results
believe that the warranty of habitability itself gives rise to a right of the tenant to have habitability impairing conditions repaired and to set off the reasonable cost of those repairs against rent claimed, when the landlord has willfully refused
access to the apartment in order to correct the alleged mold problem." When a landlord has willfully refused to repair habitability impairing conditions (see Real Property Law § 235-b), tenants have a right to arrange for those repairs
City of Auburn § 182-70 an owner is responsible to maintain his property in good repair. Moreover, the warranty of habitability (see Real Property Law § 235-b) mandates an owner to covenant and warrant that any property leased
purposeful effort to force tenants to move. Thus quite aside from the warranty of habitability, after a tenant notifies the landlord that repairs are necessary and after the landlord fails in due course to make those repairs, the tenant
correction. The department may, upon good cause shown, including consideration of the complexity of repairs which may be necessary to make the dwelling unit habitable, grant such extension for such period of time that it deems appropriate
withheld the rent due to the failure of the petitioner to make requested repairs and his belief those unrepaired items breached the warranty of habitability. The respondent took possession of 10 Lexington Avenue, a single-family dwelling, approximately 2½ years
life, health or safety in violation of the statutory warranty of habitability, notwithstanding a provision in the lease purporting to shift the responsibility of repairs to the tenant (see id.; Spatz v Axelrod Mgt. Co., 165 Misc 2d 759 [Yonkers
health or well-being had been affected by the allegedly poor repairs. Pursuant to Real Property Law § 235-b, implied in every residential lease is a warranty of habitability, which includes three covenants: "(1) that the premises
extent of the breach of the warranty of habitability. (See Park W. Mgt. Corp. v Mitchell, 47 NY2d 316 [1979].) City courts lacked jurisdiction to order landlords to make repairs in a summary proceeding. That all changed on January
also, in addition to ordinary repairs, maintenance and replacement, make other improvements to effect a rehabilitation of the property, in such fashion as is consistent with maintaining safe and habitable conditions over the remaining useful life of the dwelling
that the leak or resulting repairs somehow rendered the apartment uninhabitable or unfit for use, there was no evidence from which the trial court could reasonably find a breach of the implied warranty of habitability (see Solow v Wellner
Thus, if a tenant alleges that the landlord's failure to make repairs constructively evicts the tenant, or "is, or is likely to become, dangerous to life, health, or safety," then the court may stay a proceeding for nonpayment
Respondent has not met his burden of proving an entitlement to a rent abatement for this condition or a repair and deduct remedy. Respondent introduced into evidence summonses from the New York City Department of Buildings
Defendants maintained, among other things, that they were not required to repair plaintiff's apartment, that any repairs{**58 Misc 3d at 86} that had been made had been done gratuitously and that plaintiff had failed to prove any negligence
shall mean the period of time, as determined by the Dept., that the multiple dwelling is expected to be habitable at a level of comfort, safety and sanitation compatible with current requirements of state and city statutes, ordinances and administrative
hereby found that the enforcement of minimum standards of health and safety, fire protection, light and ventilation, cleanliness, repair and maintenance, and occupancy in dwellings is necessary to protect the people of the city against the consequences of urban blight
NY2d 316 [1979]). To prevail on a defense or counterclaim based on a breach of the warranty of habitability, a tenant must offer proof as to the dates, severity and duration of the conditions complained of (see Sinclair v Ramnarace
April 25, 2010, when the leaks had ceased. [*2] In "ascertaining damages [for a breach of the warranty of habitability], the finder of fact must weigh the severity of the violation and duration of conditions giving rise to the breach
landlord's own acknowledged deficiencies in its system of recording tenant complaints. The amount of the habitability abatement, although substantial, was within reasonable limits, given the severity of the conditions and the largely unrefuted evidence elicited by the tenant