No MCI Increase for Poorly Performed Facade Work

LVT Number: #24650

Landlord applied for MCI rent hikes based on facade restoration and roof work. The DRA ruled for landlord, then granted tenants' PAR and revoked the MCI increase. Landlord then appealed, and the rent increase was reinstated after remand to the DRA for reconsideration. But tenants then appealed again and won. Tenants claimed that there were leaks and water damage after the work was performed. When the DHCR inspected after remand, there was moisture inside various apartments, including around windows.

Landlord applied for MCI rent hikes based on facade restoration and roof work. The DRA ruled for landlord, then granted tenants' PAR and revoked the MCI increase. Landlord then appealed, and the rent increase was reinstated after remand to the DRA for reconsideration. But tenants then appealed again and won. Tenants claimed that there were leaks and water damage after the work was performed. When the DHCR inspected after remand, there was moisture inside various apartments, including around windows. The DRA ruled that since new windows were installed and a separate MCI increase was granted for that, the water intrusion had been abated. But there was no proof that the leaks were related to the old windows rather than to improper facade restoration work. The DHCR revoked the MCI increases for the facade and roof work.

499 Fort Washington Avenue: DHCR Adm. Rev. Docket No. UB430072RT (1/31/13) [5-pg. doc.]

Downloads

UB430072RT.pdf124.42 KB