Compliance Bureau Ordered Rent Cut

LVT Number: 10068

(Decision submitted by James R. Marino of the Manhattan law firm of Kucker Kraus & Bruh, attorneys for the landlord.) Tenant complained of a reduction in building services. The DRA ruled for tenant and reduced his rent. Landlord later applied for a rent restoration, stating that services had been restored. The DRA ruled against landlord, stating that since no rent reduction was warranted under the prior order, no rent restoration was needed.

(Decision submitted by James R. Marino of the Manhattan law firm of Kucker Kraus & Bruh, attorneys for the landlord.) Tenant complained of a reduction in building services. The DRA ruled for tenant and reduced his rent. Landlord later applied for a rent restoration, stating that services had been restored. The DRA ruled against landlord, stating that since no rent reduction was warranted under the prior order, no rent restoration was needed. Landlord appealed, pointing out that a rent reduction was indeed imposed by the DHCR's Compliance Bureau, which had instructed landlord to file the rent restoration application after repairs were completed. The DHCR ruled for landlord, noting that the DRA's denial of landlord's application was a mistake.

Foster Apts. Group: DHCR Adm. Rev. Dckt. Nos. EL 230206 RO; FE 230422 RO (6/16/95) [3-page document]

Downloads

EL-230206-RO.pdf143.56 KB