Extermination Services Restored

LVT Number: 19376

Tenant complained of a reduction in services based on landlord's failure to exterminate vermin. The DRA ruled for tenant and reduced her rent. Landlord later applied for rent restoration based on the restoration of services. The DRA ruled for landlord. Tenant appealed and lost. Tenant claimed that landlord still didn't provide adequate extermination services; there were roaches in her apartment. When landlord filed for a rent restoration, he claimed that tenant would not provide access. The DHCR conducted a no-access inspection and found mouse and rat droppings.

Tenant complained of a reduction in services based on landlord's failure to exterminate vermin. The DRA ruled for tenant and reduced her rent. Landlord later applied for rent restoration based on the restoration of services. The DRA ruled for landlord. Tenant appealed and lost. Tenant claimed that landlord still didn't provide adequate extermination services; there were roaches in her apartment. When landlord filed for a rent restoration, he claimed that tenant would not provide access. The DHCR conducted a no-access inspection and found mouse and rat droppings. Landlord fixed holes in the apartment walls and an exterminator came in. A follow-up inspection showed no further mouse or rat droppings. There was no finding of roaches or waterbugs during the DHCR's inspection.

Santiago: DHCR Adm. Rev. Docket No. UH410043-RT (11/30/06) [2-pg. doc.]

Downloads

UH410043RT.pdf221.4 KB