Entire Roof Not Replaced

LVT Number: 17867

Landlord applied for MCI rent hikes based on the installation of a new roof. The DRA ruled against landlord. Landlord appealed and lost. Although landlord claimed that the entire roof surface was replaced, the contracts clearly noted that the rear and side garage roofs and main lobby roof weren't replaced. Landlord submitted no proof that the main lobby roof was separate or distinct from the main roof. And landlord must also replace the garage roofs that were attached to the building.

Landlord applied for MCI rent hikes based on the installation of a new roof. The DRA ruled against landlord. Landlord appealed and lost. Although landlord claimed that the entire roof surface was replaced, the contracts clearly noted that the rear and side garage roofs and main lobby roof weren't replaced. Landlord submitted no proof that the main lobby roof was separate or distinct from the main roof. And landlord must also replace the garage roofs that were attached to the building. The fact that the garage roofs weren't physically attached to the main roofs didn't mean that they didn't have to be replaced for the roofing to qualify as an MCI. Landlord's contractor statement also didn't indicate that either the main lobby roof or the garage roofs didn't need replacement.

Daniel Webster Co.: DHCR Adm. Rev. Dckt. No. SI210078RO (12/1/04) [2-pg. doc.]

Downloads

SI210078RO.pdf117.35 KB