Elevator Operators Needn't Accept Packages for Tenants

LVT Number: 8474

Tenants complained of a reduction in building-wide services. They claimed that elevator operators had accepted mail and packages on their behalf in the past, but that landlord now instructed them not to do this. Landlord answered that it hadn't cut services. Elevator operators' acceptance of mail and packages wasn't a provided service. In fact, it was specifically barred in their job description. Some operators did it merely as a courtesy to tenants. The DRA ruled against tenants, and tenants appealed. The DHCR again ruled against tenants.

Tenants complained of a reduction in building-wide services. They claimed that elevator operators had accepted mail and packages on their behalf in the past, but that landlord now instructed them not to do this. Landlord answered that it hadn't cut services. Elevator operators' acceptance of mail and packages wasn't a provided service. In fact, it was specifically barred in their job description. Some operators did it merely as a courtesy to tenants. The DRA ruled against tenants, and tenants appealed. The DHCR again ruled against tenants. Tenants didn't show that elevator operators' acceptance of mail and packages was anything more than a courtesy provided informally and voluntarily. It wasn't a base-date service included in tenants' rents. This service also was inconsistent with the proper performance of the duties of an elevator operator. And, it was the kind of personal service that could be provided to individual tenants for a gratuity.

London Terrace Tenants Association: DHCR Adm. Rev. Dckt. No. CG 430184-RT (11/24/93) [3-page document]

Downloads

CG430184-RT.pdf170.5 KB