Landlord Didn't Prove Sheetrock Installation Improvement

LVT Number: #20975

Tenant filed a fair market rent appeal, claiming that the initial rent-stabilized rent of $1,144 was more than the fair market rent for the apartment. The DRA ruled for tenant and reduced the initial legal rent to $951. Landlord appealed, arguing that the DRA incorrectly disallowed a rent increase for extensive Sheetrock installation to the apartment costing $6,500. Landlord claimed that this work was an apartment improvement, not repair and maintenance work. The DHCR ruled against landlord. Landlord claimed 90 pieces of Sheetrock were installed throughout the apartment.

Tenant filed a fair market rent appeal, claiming that the initial rent-stabilized rent of $1,144 was more than the fair market rent for the apartment. The DRA ruled for tenant and reduced the initial legal rent to $951. Landlord appealed, arguing that the DRA incorrectly disallowed a rent increase for extensive Sheetrock installation to the apartment costing $6,500. Landlord claimed that this work was an apartment improvement, not repair and maintenance work. The DHCR ruled against landlord. Landlord claimed 90 pieces of Sheetrock were installed throughout the apartment. But photographs of the apartment by the DHCR's inspector showed that Sheetrock wasn't installed in the entire apartment. Instead, the pictures showed lumpy and cracked walls and old molding. The DRA properly disallowed any rent increase for this work.

35 LLC: DHCR Adm. Rev. Docket No. WE410082RO (10/9/08) [3-pg. doc.]

Downloads

WE410082RO.pdf279.87 KB