No MCI Rent Hike for Piecemeal Façade Work

LVT Number: #22433

Landlord applied for MCI rent hikes based on exterior façade renovations. The DRA ruled against landlord, finding that the work was done on a piecemeal basis and therefore didn’t qualify as a major capital improvement. Landlord appealed and lost. This wasn’t a unified façade restoration performed as a single project. An initial inspection was done by landlord’s engineer and detailed drawings were prepared that outlined the scope of work initially found to be required.

Landlord applied for MCI rent hikes based on exterior façade renovations. The DRA ruled against landlord, finding that the work was done on a piecemeal basis and therefore didn’t qualify as a major capital improvement. Landlord appealed and lost. This wasn’t a unified façade restoration performed as a single project. An initial inspection was done by landlord’s engineer and detailed drawings were prepared that outlined the scope of work initially found to be required. But the drawings didn’t describe every aspect of the work needed for comprehensive restoration, and once the work started, further multiple inspections were conducted, each finding that additional work was necessary. An initial contract described only a small portion of the work, and a separate contract with the same façade restoration contractor was signed a month later. Work needed on other portions of the building was eventually done under a third contract signed in 2003.

740 West End Avenue: DHCR Adm. Rev. Docket No. WL430042RO (12/31/09) [3-pg. doc.]

Downloads

WL430042RO.pdf106.05 KB