DHCR Inspection Found Elevators Not Working Properly

Tenants complained of a reduction in building-wide services. They claimed that the building's elevators weren't working properly. They pointed to three DOB violations. One violation found that one of the two elevators wasn't operating properly, and required landlord to stop using that elevator. But this violation was corrected in 2000, while tenants' DHCR complaint was pending. Still, the DHCR inspection showed that neither elevator leveled properly when descending. But the DRA ruled against tenants based on the lack of DOB violations. Tenants appealed, and the DHCR sent the case back for further consideration. On remand, landlord pointed out that the elevators were modernized in 2000. Another inspection showed that one elevator still didn't level properly. The DRA ruled for tenants and reduced their rents. Landlord appealed and lost. Landlord then challenged the DHCR's decision in court. The court ruled that the DHCR could have reasonably determined that there was a reduction in elevator service. But the court sent the case back to the DHCR to clarify its order. The court pointed out that the DHCR generally left elevator complaints to DOB or relied on DOB violation reports to make its determination. In its final order, the DHCR stated that since 1996, it relied less on DOB violation reports because there were fewer elevator inspections. During that year, DOB launched an internal anti-corruption probe at that agency.

Partnership 92 LP: DHCR Adm. Rev. Dckt. No. TJ430008RP (11/14/05) [6-pg. doc.]