Inspection Conducted Two Years After Complaint Filed

(Decision submitted by Patrick K Munson of the Manhattan law firm of Kucker Kraus & Bruh, LLP, attorneys for the landlord.) Tenant complained in 1992 of a reduction in services based on peeling paint and water marks in the kitchen, a water leak in the bathroom ceiling, and painting needed in the hallway. Tenant signed an acknowledgment a few months later that repairs had been made, which landlord submitted to the DRA. Two years later, the DRA advised landlord that tenant claimed the apartment needed to be painted. Landlord pointed out that this wasn't one of tenant's original complaints and that the apartment was painted every three years. The DRA ruled for tenant and reduced tenant's rent. Landlord appealed and lost. Landlord then brought a court case to appeal the DHCR's ruling. The court sent the case back to the DHCR for reconsideration and a second order was issued that still reduced the rent. Landlord again appealed to the court. The court ruled for landlord. Landlord hadn't received notice of tenant's additional complaint. Also, the inspection finding that the apartment needed painting didn't take place until two years after the tenant's complaint was filed. The DHCR's ruling was revoked.

West Point Leasing v. DHCR: Index No. 1635/98 (10/30/98) (Sup. Ct. Kings; Jones, J) [6-page document]