Doorman Service Not Reduced

LVT Number: 11611

(Decision submitted by Patrick K. Munson of the Manhattan law firm of Kucker Kraus & Bruh, LLP, attorneys for landlord.) Tenant complained of a reduction in building-wide services, claiming that doorman service had been reduced. The DRA ruled against tenant and dismissed the complaint. Tenant appealed, claiming that the building services registration statement (RR-3) proved that doorman services were previously provided 16 hours per day, seven days per week. The DHCR ruled against tenant. What is on the RR-3 doesn't prove base date services since there are often errors or omissions.

(Decision submitted by Patrick K. Munson of the Manhattan law firm of Kucker Kraus & Bruh, LLP, attorneys for landlord.) Tenant complained of a reduction in building-wide services, claiming that doorman service had been reduced. The DRA ruled against tenant and dismissed the complaint. Tenant appealed, claiming that the building services registration statement (RR-3) proved that doorman services were previously provided 16 hours per day, seven days per week. The DHCR ruled against tenant. What is on the RR-3 doesn't prove base date services since there are often errors or omissions. The 1984 RR-1 for the apartment states that doorman service was provided 16 hours on three days per week and eight hours on four days per week. Landlord also submitted sworn statements from three long-term tenants who stated that doorman service wasn't reduced and that it was always provided 16 hours on Friday, Saturday, and Sunday, and eight hours the rest of the week.

Hanft: DHCR Adm. Rev. Dckt. No. IJ130102RT (2/11/97) [2-page document]

Downloads

IJ130102RT.pdf102.49 KB