No MCI Rent Hike for New Roof That Leaks

LVT Number: #25021

Landlord applied for MCI rent hikes based on the installation of a new roof. The DRA ruled against landlord, who appealed and lost. One tenant had complained of leakage from the new roof into her apartment in September and October 2007. Landlord now claimed that the leaks were from the building's exterior walls, not the roof. But landlord didn't raise this claim before the DRA. And DHCR inspection in October 2008 had confirmed leakage from the roof into tenant's apartment.

Landlord applied for MCI rent hikes based on the installation of a new roof. The DRA ruled against landlord, who appealed and lost. One tenant had complained of leakage from the new roof into her apartment in September and October 2007. Landlord now claimed that the leaks were from the building's exterior walls, not the roof. But landlord didn't raise this claim before the DRA. And DHCR inspection in October 2008 had confirmed leakage from the roof into tenant's apartment.

230 West 95th Street: DHCR Adm. Rev. Docket No. XA410026RO (7/10/13) [1-pg. doc.]

Downloads

XA410026RO.pdf38.54 KB