Intercom Installation Not Timely

Landlord applied for MCI rent hikes for the installation of new entrance and lobby doors, as well as a new video-intercom system. The DRA ruled for landlord in part, but disallowed any increase for the intercom system. Landlord appealed and lost. Although there were 19 apartments in the building, landlord's contractor installed intercoms in only 18 apartments at the time the MCI was being performed. An intercom was installed for the last apartment almost two years later. Landlord claimed that tenant wouldn't provide access for the intercom installation at the time the work was being done. But the contractor's statement and landlord's letter to tenant that were submitted to the DRA were also written almost two years after the installation. There was no contemporaneous proof that tenant refused access at the time of the installation. So landlord failed to prove that the intercom installation was done on a building-wide basis.

315 East 73rd Street: DHCR Adm. Rev. Docket No. WA430015RO (10/17/12) [3-pg. doc.]