Tenants Get Permanent Exemption from MCI Rent Hikes

LVT Number: #20744

Landlord applied for MCI rent hikes based on exterior restoration work. Tenants objected. They claimed that the work was done in a defective manner. Some tenants stated that they had leaks and water damage in their apartments after the work was done. The DRA ruled for landlord, except that tenants with water damage were ruled exempt until the damage was repaired. Tenants appealed, arguing that the work was so poorly done that no increases should have been granted for any tenants. The DHCR ruled against tenants generally.

Landlord applied for MCI rent hikes based on exterior restoration work. Tenants objected. They claimed that the work was done in a defective manner. Some tenants stated that they had leaks and water damage in their apartments after the work was done. The DRA ruled for landlord, except that tenants with water damage were ruled exempt until the damage was repaired. Tenants appealed, arguing that the work was so poorly done that no increases should have been granted for any tenants. The DHCR ruled against tenants generally. The DHCR found that landlord proved that an extensive exterior restoration work was performed. However, DHCR inspection showed that nine apartments with leaks or water damage had peeling paint, cracked or damaged walls or stains, crumbling plaster, and wetness. Given the extent of the damage, these tenants should be permanently exempt from any MCI rent hike.

27 West 96th Street: DHCR Adm. Rev. Docket No. SJ430047RT (7/10/08) [3-pg. doc.]

Downloads

SJ430047RT.pdf563.59 KB