Inspection Found No Water Leaks
LVT Number: 10906
(Decision submitted by James R. Marino of the Manhattan law firm of Kucker Kraus & Bruh, attorneys for the landlord.) Landlord applied for MCI rent hikes based on the installation of a new roof, brick work around the parapet, and the cost of an engineering consultant. The DRA ruled for landlord. Tenants appealed, claiming that the roof leaked. The DHCR ruled against tenants. Tenants never complained about roof leaks while landlord's MCI application was pending before the DRA. An inspection done while the application was pending showed no signs of water seepage.
2600 Netherland Ave.: DHCR Admin. Rev. Dckt. Nos. JL610151RT, JL610178RT, JL610179RT, JL610182RT–JL610190RT, JL610195RT–JL610199RT, JL610201RT, JL610202RT, JL610204RT–JL610206RT, JL610211RT (9/9/96) [2-page document]
Downloads
| JL610151RT.pdf | 104.98 KB |