Checks Issued to Various Employees of Contractor

LVT Number: 14297

Landlord applied for MCI rent hikes based on pointing and waterproofing. The DRA ruled for landlord in part, but allowed only $2,350 out of the claimed cost of $7,150 to be used in calculating the increase, because only that amount was paid to landlord's contractor. Landlord appealed, explaining that the balance of the cost was paid directly to the contractor's employees. Landlord submitted a sworn statement from the contractor explaining the payment breakdown. The DHCR ruled for landlord and allowed the rest of the cost to be added when calculating the MCI rent increase.

Landlord applied for MCI rent hikes based on pointing and waterproofing. The DRA ruled for landlord in part, but allowed only $2,350 out of the claimed cost of $7,150 to be used in calculating the increase, because only that amount was paid to landlord's contractor. Landlord appealed, explaining that the balance of the cost was paid directly to the contractor's employees. Landlord submitted a sworn statement from the contractor explaining the payment breakdown. The DHCR ruled for landlord and allowed the rest of the cost to be added when calculating the MCI rent increase.

902 59th St.: DHCR Adm. Rev. Dckt. No. NL210016RO (6/7/00) [2-pg. doc.]

Downloads

NL210016RO.pdf115.15 KB