Increase Denied Due to Hazardous Violations

March 1, 2008

LVT Number: #20289

Landlord applied for MCI rent hikes based on capital improvements. The DRA ruled against landlord because HPD records showed there were outstanding class "C," immediately hazardous, violations. Landlord appealed, claiming that all the "C" violations had been cured and submitted a sworn statement from a licensed architect supporting that claim. The DHCR ruled against landlord. While landlord's application was before the DRA, HPD records showed a total of 27 class "C" violations outstanding. This was sufficient proof of hazardous violations to warrant dismissal of landlord's application.

Landlord applied for MCI rent hikes based on capital improvements. The DRA ruled against landlord because HPD records showed there were outstanding class "C," immediately hazardous, violations. Landlord appealed, claiming that all the "C" violations had been cured and submitted a sworn statement from a licensed architect supporting that claim. The DHCR ruled against landlord. While landlord's application was before the DRA, HPD records showed a total of 27 class "C" violations outstanding. This was sufficient proof of hazardous violations to warrant dismissal of landlord's application. The statement of landlord's architect didn't state what specific conditions he observed and what was corrected.

34-36 East 4th Street: DHCR Adm. Rev. Docket No. TH410059RO (1/16/08) [2-pg. doc.]

Downloads

TH410059RO.pdf184.22 KB

Topics

More like this