Ordered that the order and judgment is affirmed insofar as appealed from, without costs or disbursements.
The plaintiff moved into a rent-stabilized apartment upon the death of his mother, who had resided there as a nonpurchasing tenant when the building converted to a cooperative. The plaintiff allegedly moved into the premises based upon the representations of the managing agent that he would take occupancy as a rent-stabilized tenant who would be entitled to a rent-stabilized lease renewal upon the expiration of the existing lease.
Contrary to the plaintiffs contention, he was not entitled to be named as a tenant on the renewal lease. The plaintiff did not reside at the premises with his mother, the nonpurchasing tenant, for a period of at least two years immediately preceding her death ( see, Tagert v 211 E. 70th St. Co., 63 NY2d 818; M L Jacobs v DelGrosso, 128 Misc 2d 725).
The plaintiff contends that the defendants should be estopped from denying him the status of a rent-stabilized tenant and that their actions constituted a waiver of any claim that he was not a rent-stabilized tenant. However, coverage under a rent regulatory scheme is governed by statute and cannot be created by waiver or equitable estoppel ( see, 512 E. 11th St. HDFC v Grimmet, 148 Misc 2d 971, 972, affd on other grounds 181 AD2d 488; Williams v Gallagher, NYU, Mar. 6, 1991, at 23, col 3; New York Univ. v Owens, NYLJ, June 6, 1990, at 21, col 2; Wilson v One Ten Duane St. Realty Co., 123 AD2d 198).
The plaintiffs remaining contentions are without merit.