Broken Roof Lock Isn't Minor Condition

LVT Number: 19314

Tenants complained of a reduction in building-wide services based on the removal of a roof door lock. The DRA ruled for tenants. Landlord appealed and lost. Landlord claimed that the roof now had a lock in the door handle, which replaced a locking boxed mechanism. Landlord also argued that even if the roof door latch was missing, this was a minor condition. The DHCR inspection showed that the roof door wasn't locked and that the roof door actually was ajar, allowing access into the building from the roof. The failure to lock the roof wasn't a minor condition.

Tenants complained of a reduction in building-wide services based on the removal of a roof door lock. The DRA ruled for tenants. Landlord appealed and lost. Landlord claimed that the roof now had a lock in the door handle, which replaced a locking boxed mechanism. Landlord also argued that even if the roof door latch was missing, this was a minor condition. The DHCR inspection showed that the roof door wasn't locked and that the roof door actually was ajar, allowing access into the building from the roof. The failure to lock the roof wasn't a minor condition.

Neighborhood West 126 St. LLC: DHCR Adm. Rev. Docket No. UG410020-RO (10/27/06) [2-pg. doc.]

Downloads

UG410020RO.pdf114.46 KB