In Bazile v. Rubin, 165 AD3d 793 (2d Dept. 2018), the Second Department reinstated a DHCR order that granted an owner’s application to replace part-time lobby attendants with a video security system. The decision highlights DHCR’s evolving policy with respect to replacing live security personnel with security cameras.

Substitution of Services

RSC section 2522.4(e)(3) provides that “an owner may file an application to modify or substitute services, at no change in the legal regulated rent…on the grounds that…such modification or substitution is not inconsistent with the RSL or the Code.” Over the years, owners have used this provision to seek DHCR’s permission to replace lobby attendants and doormen with security cameras. These applications became more popular with the advent of “virtual” or “cyber” doorman systems.

Substitution Denied