Building Leaked Despite Pointing/Waterproofing Work

LVT Number: 9823

Landlord applied for MCI rent increases based on pointing and waterproofing. Tenants objected, claiming continued leakage problems. Landlord didn't respond to these objections. The DRA ruled against landlord, disallowing any rent increase for the pointing and waterproofing work. Landlord appealed and the DHCR ruled against landlord. Although landlord submitted a contractor's certification of the work done, landlord never responded to tenants' claims of continued leaks or to the DHCR's request for a diagram indicating the areas where work was performed.

Landlord applied for MCI rent increases based on pointing and waterproofing. Tenants objected, claiming continued leakage problems. Landlord didn't respond to these objections. The DRA ruled against landlord, disallowing any rent increase for the pointing and waterproofing work. Landlord appealed and the DHCR ruled against landlord. Although landlord submitted a contractor's certification of the work done, landlord never responded to tenants' claims of continued leaks or to the DHCR's request for a diagram indicating the areas where work was performed. Therefore, a question remained as to whether the pointing and waterproofing work was comprehensive.

50-22 Associates: DHCR Adm. Rev. Dckt. No. CH 130226 RO (2/2/95) [4-page document]

Downloads

CH130226RO.pdf206.44 KB