No MCI Rent Hike for Courtyard, Walkway Resurfacing

LVT Number: #20074

Landlord applied for MCI rent hikes based on concrete resurfacing of the courtyards and walkways outside the building. The DRA ruled against landlord because tenants didn't have access to these areas. Landlord appealed, claiming that the concrete resurfacing was done to stop major flooding in the building's basement. The DHCR ruled against landlord. Landlord didn't raise this issue before the DRA. And, in any event, the work didn't qualify as an MCI. Because tenants don't have access to the courtyard and walkways, the work doesn't qualify for an MCI rent hike.

Landlord applied for MCI rent hikes based on concrete resurfacing of the courtyards and walkways outside the building. The DRA ruled against landlord because tenants didn't have access to these areas. Landlord appealed, claiming that the concrete resurfacing was done to stop major flooding in the building's basement. The DHCR ruled against landlord. Landlord didn't raise this issue before the DRA. And, in any event, the work didn't qualify as an MCI. Because tenants don't have access to the courtyard and walkways, the work doesn't qualify for an MCI rent hike.

8615 Fort Hamilton Parkway: DHCR Adm. Rev. Docket Nos. UC230003RO, UB230070RT (10/26/07) [4-pg. doc.]

Downloads

UC 230003-RO.pdf1.12 MB