Kitchen Floor Damage Wasn't a Minor Condition

LVT Number: #32322

Rent-stabilized tenant complained in 2021 of a reduction in required services based on a number of conditions throughout his apartment. The DRA ruled for tenant, reduced his rent and ordered restoration of services. Landlord appealed and lost. Landlord argued that the services in question were de minimis and/or didn't exist. In particular, landlord claimed that kitchen floor conditions were de minimis and weren't mentioned by tenant in his complaint. But tenant raised concerns with the tiles in the apartment.

Rent-stabilized tenant complained in 2021 of a reduction in required services based on a number of conditions throughout his apartment. The DRA ruled for tenant, reduced his rent and ordered restoration of services. Landlord appealed and lost. Landlord argued that the services in question were de minimis and/or didn't exist. In particular, landlord claimed that kitchen floor conditions were de minimis and weren't mentioned by tenant in his complaint. But tenant raised concerns with the tiles in the apartment. And the conditions reported by DHCR's inspector weren't de minimis. The DHCR inspector's report found the kitchen floor to be damaged with various areas of gaps between planks, scratches, and water damage to the floor in various areas of the apartment. 

Stemar Group LLC: DHCR Adm. Rev. Docket No. KQ420004RO (10/6/22)[4-pg. document]

Downloads

KQ42004RO.pdf276.22 KB