Lintel Replacement Not Done with Window Installation

LVT Number: 16121

Landlord applied for MCI rent hikes based on pointing and lintel replacement at its building complex. The DRA ruled against landlord. Landlord appealed and lost. The pointing work wasn't comprehensive and so didn't qualify. Replacement of window lintels, by itself, didn't qualify as an MCI. Since landlord's pointing work didn't qualify, the lintel replacement didn't qualify. Landlord also argued that the lintel work was done in connection with new window installations.

Landlord applied for MCI rent hikes based on pointing and lintel replacement at its building complex. The DRA ruled against landlord. Landlord appealed and lost. The pointing work wasn't comprehensive and so didn't qualify. Replacement of window lintels, by itself, didn't qualify as an MCI. Since landlord's pointing work didn't qualify, the lintel replacement didn't qualify. Landlord also argued that the lintel work was done in connection with new window installations. But the window installations weren't done until six years after the lintel work, and landlord offered no explanation for the delay.

Phipps Houses: DHCR Admin. Rev. Dckt. No. JK130157RO (9/27/02) [12-pg. doc.]

Downloads

JK130157RO.pdf682.06 KB