MCI Granted for CCTV Security System

LVT Number: #25833

Landlord applied for MCI rent hikes based on the installation of a new CCTV security system, four wooden entrance doors, new windows and lintels, a sidewalk bridge, and engineer fees in connection with the window installation. The DRA ruled for landlord in part but disallowed the cost of the entrance doors and consulting engineer fees. Tenants appealed, claiming that the useful life of the prior security camera system hadn't expired. Tenants also claimed that the prior landlord had previously replaced windows in many renovated apartments. The DHCR ruled against tenants.

Landlord applied for MCI rent hikes based on the installation of a new CCTV security system, four wooden entrance doors, new windows and lintels, a sidewalk bridge, and engineer fees in connection with the window installation. The DRA ruled for landlord in part but disallowed the cost of the entrance doors and consulting engineer fees. Tenants appealed, claiming that the useful life of the prior security camera system hadn't expired. Tenants also claimed that the prior landlord had previously replaced windows in many renovated apartments. The DHCR ruled against tenants. The prior security system didn't have cameras located at every building entrance, and didn't have cameras that were monitored by a working monitor on a continuous basis. The new CCTV security system therefore wasn't a mere replacement of the prior security system. Landlord also installed 607 new aluminum windows and did so in each of the building's apartments. Tenants presented no proof of prior window installations and no prior MCI increase was granted for windows.

330 East 63rd Street: DHCR Adm. Rev. Docket No. ZA410049RT (8/15/14) [3-pg. doc.]

Downloads

ZA410049RT.pdf2.14 MB