LVT Number: 18622
(Decision submitted by James R. Marino of the Manhattan law firm of Kucker & Bruh, LLP, attorneys for the landlord.) Landlord applied for MCI rent hikes based on the installation of new windows. The DRA ruled for landlord. Tenants appealed and lost. Tenants' first claim, that landlord was using the building as a transient hotel, wasn't raised before the DRA. Tenant's second claim, that the DRA didn't properly inspect, was without merit. The DRA also properly charged tenants their portion of the MCI rent hike.
Various Tenants: DHCR Adm. Rev. Dckt. No. TH430049RT (1/12/06) [4-pg. doc.]