HPD provided temporary housing for tenants and then filed liens against the tenants’ former landlords for expenses in providing the temporary housing. The Court of Appeals issued one opinion involving two separate cases concerning expenses incurred by the Department of Housing Preservation and Development for temporary shelter. In 1995 the Fire Department issued a vacate order affecting two tenants of a building in Brooklyn owned by David Rivera. HPD provided the tenants with temporary shelter services in single-room occupancy apartments from June 1995 through December 1995. HPD, acting under the City’s Administrative Code, filed a notice of lien against Rivera’s building seeking reimbursement for HPD’s expenses.

In 2012 Rivera sued in Kings County Supreme Court to vacate the lien.  Supreme Court Justice Carl J. Landicino dismissed the petition and upheld HPD’s lien. The Appellate Division, Second Department affirmed.

In the second case, in 2010 the Department of Buildings issued a vacate order affecting occupants of a cellar of a building owned by Leonardo Enriquez. HPD provided relocation services to one of the displaced tenants in a hotel from June 2010 until June 2011. HPD filed a notice of lien for the hotel expenses against Enriquez’s building.

Enriquez sued to vacate the lien. The Supreme Court, Bronx County upheld the lien and Enriquez appealed. The Appellate Division, First Department, reversed and dismissed the lien. The court ruled that the tenant’s residence in a hotel for an entire year was not reasonable and did not qualify as temporary benefits. The court invalided the lien and summarily discharged it. [21 City L. 55 (2015)]

The Court of Appeals consolidated the two cases, ruled that both liens were facially valid, and upheld both HPD liens. The Court ruled that resolution of disputes over expenses claimed in an HPD lien may only be resolved by trial and not by summary proceedings. The Council’s purpose in providing for a broadly defined lien based on relocation expenses was to prevent unscrupulous landlords from using code violations as a way to evict tenants that they could not otherwise legally evict. The liens in both the Rivera and Enriquez cases were facially valid. The challenges by the landlords as to the amounts or categories had to be tried and could not be resolved by the court on a motion for summary dismissal.

David Rivera v. NYC HPD, 52 N.Y.S.3d 270 (N.Y. 2017).