Court: New Jersey Superior Court Appellate Division; June 29, 1992; New Jersey; State Appellate Court
In a summary dispossession action for non-payment of rent under N.J.S.A. 2A:18-61.1a, the trial court found that the defendant owed the plaintiff $1,640 for damages caused by negligent actions, specifically flushing cat litter that resulted in sewer blockage and flood damage. The lease stipulated that tenants are responsible for costs associated with damage from misuse or neglect, and any unpaid amounts become additional rent. The defendant's base rent was $302.39 per month, leading to a total rent of $1,942.39 after the additional damage charge.
On appeal, the defendant argued that the finding of negligence was unsupported by evidence and claimed that the additional rent violated the Newark rent control ordinance. The court dismissed the negligence claim as meritless but agreed that the additional rent was not authorized under the ordinance. The ordinance prohibits landlords from charging rent above prior levels without proper authorization, defining rent to include various charges related to housing occupancy. It limits rent increases to 5% for smaller buildings and 4% for larger ones without prior approval from the rent control board. The ordinance is intended to be liberally construed to achieve its objectives.
The landlord, as plaintiff, has classified damages as “additional rent” in the lease, invoking N.J.S.A. 2A:18-61.1a for jurisdiction. However, it is inappropriate for the plaintiff to assert that these damages are rent while simultaneously denying their classification under the rent control ordinance. The ordinance broadly defines rent to include charges for the use or occupancy of housing, as well as damage and cleaning deposits, suggesting that the plaintiff's claims fit within this framework.
The rent control ordinance includes provisions for tax surcharges and utility expense increases, all requiring rent control board approval, while also allowing rental increases for capital improvements and landlord hardships. Notably, it prohibits rent increases based on tenant-caused damages and limits any rental increase to no more than 25% in a single year to prevent hardship on tenants.
In this case, the landlord's attempt to increase rent by approximately $600 from one month to the next, leading to tenant dispossession, violates the ordinance, resulting in the court lacking jurisdiction to grant possession under N.J.S.A. 2A:18-61.1a. The landlord also sought dispossession under N.J.S.A. 2A:18-61.1c due to alleged tenant negligence, but the trial court's finding that the tenant did not act willfully or negligently renders this issue moot. Consequently, the judgment for possession is reversed. The defendant does not dispute that damages can be considered rent under N.J.S.A. 2A:18-61.1a.
