Apartment Entrance Doors

LVT Number: 17863

(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 apartment entrance doors. The DRA ruled against landlord, and landlord appealed. Landlord had installed two entrance doors to each of eight apartments. The DHCR ruled for landlord in part. The entrance doors qualified as an MCI. But the DHCR disallowed any rent hike for the installation of marble door saddles or door painting. Landlord installed saddles for only 12 doors and painted only 14 of them.

(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 apartment entrance doors. The DRA ruled against landlord, and landlord appealed. Landlord had installed two entrance doors to each of eight apartments. The DHCR ruled for landlord in part. The entrance doors qualified as an MCI. But the DHCR disallowed any rent hike for the installation of marble door saddles or door painting. Landlord installed saddles for only 12 doors and painted only 14 of them.

325 Third Street, LLC: DHCR Adm. Rev. Dckt. No. SF210038RO (1/19/05) [4-pg. doc.]

Downloads

SF210038RO.pdf171.64 KB