Landlord Restored Elevator Service

LVT Number: 15405

(Decision submitted by James R. Marino of the Manhattan law firm of Kucker & Bruh, LLP, attorneys for the landlord.) Tenant complained of a reduction in services based on elevator problems. The DRA ruled for tenant. Landlord later applied for rent restoration based on restoration of services. The DRA ruled for landlord. Tenant appealed, claiming that there were still elevator problems. The DHCR ruled against tenant. A DRA inspector found the elevator to be in proper working order after landlord applied for rent restoration.

(Decision submitted by James R. Marino of the Manhattan law firm of Kucker & Bruh, LLP, attorneys for the landlord.) Tenant complained of a reduction in services based on elevator problems. The DRA ruled for tenant. Landlord later applied for rent restoration based on restoration of services. The DRA ruled for landlord. Tenant appealed, claiming that there were still elevator problems. The DHCR ruled against tenant. A DRA inspector found the elevator to be in proper working order after landlord applied for rent restoration.

Franks: DHCR Admin. Rev. Dckt. No. PE430040RT (9/27/01) [2-pg. doc.]

Downloads

PE430040RT.pdf83.76 KB