Landlord Corrected Enough Violations for 2006-07 MBR Increases

LVT Number: #20012

Landlord filed for 2006-07 MBR increases for rent-controlled tenants in the building. The DRA ruled for landlord. Tenants challenged the MBR increase order, claiming landlord wasn't maintaining essential services and therefore wasn't entitled to receive the MBR increase. Tenants said that the building was rat-infested, heat was inadequate, and there were other building service problems. The DRA ruled against tenants. Tenants appealed and lost. HPD records showed that during the two-year period ending on Jan.

Landlord filed for 2006-07 MBR increases for rent-controlled tenants in the building. The DRA ruled for landlord. Tenants challenged the MBR increase order, claiming landlord wasn't maintaining essential services and therefore wasn't entitled to receive the MBR increase. Tenants said that the building was rat-infested, heat was inadequate, and there were other building service problems. The DRA ruled against tenants. Tenants appealed and lost. HPD records showed that during the two-year period ending on Jan. 1, 2005, HPD didn't record a single rent-impairing violation at the building and recorded only 12 non-rent-impairing violations. Landlord showed that it cleared at least 10 of the non-rent-impairing violations. Landlord's super also submitted a sworn statement that two rent-impairing violations in one apartment and 10 non-rent-impairing violations in another apartment had been cleared. One of those apartments was now vacant and the tenant of the other one didn't challenge the MBR increase.

Healy: DHCR Adm. Rev. Docket No. VE420002RT (9/11/07) [3-pg. doc.]

Downloads

DOC071107VE420002-RT.pdf74.83 KB