Bathroom Renovation Was Apartment Improvement, Not Substantial Rehabilitation
LVT Number: 8342
Landlord applied for a rent increase, based on tenant's consent to individual apartment improvements in a Yonkers building. Landlord renovated tenant's bathroom by modernizing tile walls, tile floor, light fixture, and medicine cabinet. The total cost was $3,500. The DRA granted landlord's application, and gave him a 1/40th rent increase. The DRA later amended the order. The contract for landlord's work was signed after June 29, 1990. The MCI Recoupment Law went into effect on this date. The DRA stated that this work should be treated as a substantial rehabilitation because landlord's contract was signed after this new law went into effect. So, the rent increase was equal to the cost of the work divided by 84, not 40. This resulted in a much lower monthly rent increase. Landlord appealed, claiming that the work done was apartment improvements. The DHCR agreed, and ruled for landlord. The bathroom modernization was done with tenant's consent, and tenant had signed the DHCR's official form used for this purpose. An inspection confirmed that the work was done, and landlord submitted proof of the cost. Landlord was entitled to the 1/40th rent increase that was originally granted.
McBain: DHCR Adm. Rev. Dckt. Nos. GH 910251-RO, GJ 910204-RO (9/1/93) [3-page document]