Landlord Provided Itemized Breakdown of Costs

LVT Number: 16399

(Decision submitted by Daniel S. Lopresti of the Manhattan law firm of Shaw & Binder, attorneys for the landlord.) Tenant filed a fair market rent appeal, challenging the apartment's initial rent-stabilized rent. The DRA ruled against tenant, finding that the rent charged by landlord wasn't greater than the fair market rent. Tenant appealed. He said no increase should have been granted for landlord's 1/40th improvements to the apartment because landlord didn't properly document the costs and much of the work was ordinary repair work. The DHCR ruled against tenant.

(Decision submitted by Daniel S. Lopresti of the Manhattan law firm of Shaw & Binder, attorneys for the landlord.) Tenant filed a fair market rent appeal, challenging the apartment's initial rent-stabilized rent. The DRA ruled against tenant, finding that the rent charged by landlord wasn't greater than the fair market rent. Tenant appealed. He said no increase should have been granted for landlord's 1/40th improvements to the apartment because landlord didn't properly document the costs and much of the work was ordinary repair work. The DHCR ruled against tenant. Landlord submitted sufficient proof of the $8,000 apartment improvement costs, including an invoice from a kitchen contractor, an itemized breakdown of the work done in the kitchen, and canceled checks paid to the contractor. None of the costs submitted consisted of repair and maintenance work.

Kantra/Paparro: DHCR Adm. Rev. Dckt. No. QK410104RT (2/6/03) [4-pg. doc.]

Downloads

QK410104RT.pdf263.22 KB