Renovation Made to ‘Unsafe' Building

LVT Number: 18037

After a building department finding that landlord's building was unsafe, landlord performed substantial rehabilitation. Tenants had to vacate their apartments while the work was being done. The building then became deregulated, except for three tenants who had lived in the building before and after the substantial rehab. Landlord applied for rent increases for these tenants. The DRA ruled for landlord and increased tenants' rents by $91 per room per month.

After a building department finding that landlord's building was unsafe, landlord performed substantial rehabilitation. Tenants had to vacate their apartments while the work was being done. The building then became deregulated, except for three tenants who had lived in the building before and after the substantial rehab. Landlord applied for rent increases for these tenants. The DRA ruled for landlord and increased tenants' rents by $91 per room per month. Tenants appealed, claiming that landlord needed their written consent to get the rent increase because the work was being done while they had to vacate the apartments after the building was declared unsafe. They also claimed that the rent increase was too high. The DHCR ruled for tenants in part. Landlord was entitled to rent increases based on the cost of the substantial rehabilitation. However, any rent increase was capped at 15 percent per year. So landlord couldn't collect the full rent increase during the first year it applied.

Hardimon: DHCR Adm. Rev. Dckt. No. SH910049RT (2/9/05) [3-pg. doc.]

Downloads

SH910049RT.pdf195.07 KB