Elimination of Courtyard Not Minor

LVT Number: #21280

Tenants complained of a reduction in building-wide services after landlord eliminated courtyard services. The DRA ruled for tenants and reduced their rents. Landlord appealed and lost. Landlord claimed that the removal of the courtyard was a minor condition. Tenants didn't complain for more than five years after the change occurred. The courtyard wasn't a tenant gathering place or a means of getting in and out of the building. Landlord also denied there ever was a garden in the courtyard.

Tenants complained of a reduction in building-wide services after landlord eliminated courtyard services. The DRA ruled for tenants and reduced their rents. Landlord appealed and lost. Landlord claimed that the removal of the courtyard was a minor condition. Tenants didn't complain for more than five years after the change occurred. The courtyard wasn't a tenant gathering place or a means of getting in and out of the building. Landlord also denied there ever was a garden in the courtyard. The DHCR found that the courtyard was an established required service that landlord removed without permission from the agency. Tenants submitted newspaper photos and a letter from prior landlord proving that there had been a garden in the courtyard. Some tenants also had filed DHCR harassment complaints, as well as complaints to DOB, within four years of the elimination of the courtyard.

Alliance 77, LLC: DHCR Adm. Rev. Docket No. WK410031RO (4/17/09) [3-pg. doc.]

Downloads

WK410031RO.pdf96.97 KB