DHCR Must Follow Its Prior Opinion Approving Proposed MCI

Landlord applied for MCI rent hikes based on pointing and waterproofing, elevator upgrades, parking lot paving, and installation of a new front door. The DRA ruled for landlord in part, but disallowed any increase for pointing and waterproofing. The DRA found that the pointing and waterproofing done were spot work amounting to routine maintenance. Landlord appealed, pointing out that it had requested a Prior Opinion from the DHCR before it began the work. The DHCR again ruled against landlord. Landlord then filed a court petition, claiming that the DHCR's decision was unreasonable. The court agreed and sent the case back to the DHCR, which then granted the MCI rent hike. The DRA incorrectly ignored the agency's Prior Opinion Order, which determined that landlord's proposed pointing and waterproofing was sufficient to qualify as an MCI. The work done matched the proposed work and cost $115,000 less than proposed.

Heritage Place, LLC: DHCR Adm. Rev. Docket No. YG710003RP (9/3/10) [4-pg. doc.]