Back-Flow Preventer Installed 18 Months After New Boiler

December 1, 1993

LVT Number: 8367

Landlord applied for MCI rent hikes based on the installation of a new boiler and back-flow preventer. The DRA approved a rent increase for the boiler only. Landlord appealed, claiming the back-flow preventer was required by the DOB and should be considered part of the MCI. The DHCR ruled against landlord. The back-flow preventer cost $150 and was installed 18 months after the new boiler. This was a repair, not a major capital improvement.

Landlord applied for MCI rent hikes based on the installation of a new boiler and back-flow preventer. The DRA approved a rent increase for the boiler only. Landlord appealed, claiming the back-flow preventer was required by the DOB and should be considered part of the MCI. The DHCR ruled against landlord. The back-flow preventer cost $150 and was installed 18 months after the new boiler. This was a repair, not a major capital improvement. Also, it couldn't be considered part of the boiler installation because landlord didn't install the back-flow preventer within a reasonable time after installing the boiler itself.

Bryant: DHCR Adm. Rev. Dckt. No. EG 430036-RO (10/27/93) [3-page document]

Downloads

EG430036-RO.pdf137.43 KB

Topics

More like this