DRA Shouldn't Have Ordered Inspection

December 1, 1996

LVT Number: 11106

Tenant complained of a reduction in services. The DRA ruled for tenant and reduced his rent. Landlord later filed an application to restore the rent. An inspection showed that repairs were still needed, so the DRA ruled against landlord. Landlord appealed. Tenant had signed landlord's application, confirming that the required repairs had been made. The DHCR inspection was made over a year after landlord filed the rent restoration application and listed conditions that weren't part of tenant's original complaint. The DHCR ruled for landlord.

Tenant complained of a reduction in services. The DRA ruled for tenant and reduced his rent. Landlord later filed an application to restore the rent. An inspection showed that repairs were still needed, so the DRA ruled against landlord. Landlord appealed. Tenant had signed landlord's application, confirming that the required repairs had been made. The DHCR inspection was made over a year after landlord filed the rent restoration application and listed conditions that weren't part of tenant's original complaint. The DHCR ruled for landlord. The DRA shouldn't have ordered an inspection when tenant had already consented to the rent restoration.

Pistilli: DHCR Adm. Rev. Dckt. No. HL 110262-RO (7/30/96) [3-page document]

Downloads

HL110262-RO.pdf148.94 KB

Topics

More like this