No Rent Hike for Painting and Refinishing Floors

LVT Number: #21209

Rent-stabilized tenant complained of a rent overcharge. Landlord claimed that it spent $15,000 on individual apartment improvements before tenant moved in. The DRA ruled for tenant and ordered landlord to refund $17,700, including triple damages. The DRA disallowed $1,350 of landlord's claimed improvement costs and froze tenant's rent based on landlord's failure to file a 2005 annual rent registration statement. Landlord appealed, claiming that there was no willful overcharge and that the DRA should have granted a rent increase for the disallowed work. The DHCR ruled against landlord.

Rent-stabilized tenant complained of a rent overcharge. Landlord claimed that it spent $15,000 on individual apartment improvements before tenant moved in. The DRA ruled for tenant and ordered landlord to refund $17,700, including triple damages. The DRA disallowed $1,350 of landlord's claimed improvement costs and froze tenant's rent based on landlord's failure to file a 2005 annual rent registration statement. Landlord appealed, claiming that there was no willful overcharge and that the DRA should have granted a rent increase for the disallowed work. The DHCR ruled against landlord. The DRA disallowed any increase for refinishing hardwood floors and repainting the apartment. Landlord claimed that this was part of the cost of the entire renovation. But most of the claimed work was performed in the bathroom and kitchen. And painting and refinishing floors was ordinary repair and maintenance work, not apartment improvement work.

172 Bergen Street: DHCR Adm. Rev. Docket No. XA210037RO (3/23/09) [2-pg. doc.]

Downloads

XA210037RO.pdf58.98 KB