Denial of Roof Access Was Minor Condition

(Decision submitted by James R. Marino of the Manhattan law firm of Kucker Kraus & Bruh, LLP, attorneys for the landlord.) Tenants complained in 1994 of a reduction in building-wide services. They claimed that landlord had eliminated access to the roof for recreational purposes after installing an alarm. The DRA ruled against tenants, finding that roof access was a minor condition that didn't warrant a rent reduction. Tenants appealed, claiming that the DHCR improperly applied its de minimis policy retroactively to their complaint. The DHCR ruled against tenants. Although tenants' complaint was filed in 1994, it was processed after the DHCR's policy went into effect in November 1995. Tenants knew what the policy was when they responded to the DRA's requests for further information. The policy was properly applied to a pending case.

124 E. 85th St. Tenants Assn.: DHCR Adm. Rev. Dckt. No. NG430051RT (12/2/99) [3-pg. doc.]