Doorman Service Restored

LVT Number: 19318

Tenants complained of a reduction in building-wide services based on reduced doorman service. The DRA ruled for tenants and reduced their rents. Landlord later applied for a rent restoration based on the restoration of doorman service. The DRA ruled for landlord. Tenants appealed and lost. Tenants claimed that the doorman was supposed to start work at 7 p.m., but that he didn't get to his post until 7:30 p.m. or 8 p.m. Landlord argued that the doorman's duties included periodic patrols of the building and the grounds, starting at 7 p.m.

Tenants complained of a reduction in building-wide services based on reduced doorman service. The DRA ruled for tenants and reduced their rents. Landlord later applied for a rent restoration based on the restoration of doorman service. The DRA ruled for landlord. Tenants appealed and lost. Tenants claimed that the doorman was supposed to start work at 7 p.m., but that he didn't get to his post until 7:30 p.m. or 8 p.m. Landlord argued that the doorman's duties included periodic patrols of the building and the grounds, starting at 7 p.m. The DHCR said that landlord submitted payroll records, sign-in logs, and sworn statements from the doormen, proving that the doorman service had been restored. These records showed that doorman service was provided seven days a week from 7 p.m. to 7 a.m.

Sepaul: DHCR Adm. Rev. Docket No. UE210012-RT (9/15/06) [2-pg. doc.]

Downloads

UE210012-RT.pdf114.63 KB