Landlord Replaced Floor Tiles with Tiles That Didn't Match

LVT Number: #24916

Rent-stabilized tenant complained of a reduction in services based on a number of apartment conditions. The DRA ruled for tenant and reduced his rent. The DRA's initial inspection found cracked and missing kitchen floor tiles, a defective dining room window, and carpet that was worn, soiled, and buckled. A second inspection showed that the kitchen floor tiles were replaced with mismatched tiles, a screw was placed into the dining room frame to keep the window up, and the carpet throughout the apartment remained in the same condition. Landlord appealed and lost.

Rent-stabilized tenant complained of a reduction in services based on a number of apartment conditions. The DRA ruled for tenant and reduced his rent. The DRA's initial inspection found cracked and missing kitchen floor tiles, a defective dining room window, and carpet that was worn, soiled, and buckled. A second inspection showed that the kitchen floor tiles were replaced with mismatched tiles, a screw was placed into the dining room frame to keep the window up, and the carpet throughout the apartment remained in the same condition. Landlord appealed and lost. Among other things, landlord claimed that the new tiles were purchased to match the old tiles. But the DHCR's inspection report and photographs showed that the replacement tiles were a much lighter color than the other older tiles and didn't match.

Ezra: DHCR Adm. Rev. Docket No. AP210025RO (5/9/13) [4-pg. doc.]

Downloads

AP210025RO.pdf192.88 KB