Landlord Didn't Replace Elevator's Selector System

LVT Number: 16123

Landlord applied for MCI rent hikes based on the upgrading of the two elevators in the building after an explosion. The DRA ruled for landlord. Tenants appealed, claiming that there was no upgrade, so no MCI hikes should be granted. The DHCR ruled for tenants and revoked the rent hikes. To qualify as an MCI, elevator upgrading must include replacement of the controller and selector. Since landlord didn't replace the selector, the work didn't qualify as an MCI. In addition, the DHCR found that the elevator upgrade wasn't done in a workmanlike manner.

Landlord applied for MCI rent hikes based on the upgrading of the two elevators in the building after an explosion. The DRA ruled for landlord. Tenants appealed, claiming that there was no upgrade, so no MCI hikes should be granted. The DHCR ruled for tenants and revoked the rent hikes. To qualify as an MCI, elevator upgrading must include replacement of the controller and selector. Since landlord didn't replace the selector, the work didn't qualify as an MCI. In addition, the DHCR found that the elevator upgrade wasn't done in a workmanlike manner.

45 E. 135th St.: DHCR Admin. Rev. Dckt. No. NF410012RP (9/24/02) [8-pg. doc.]

Downloads

NF410012RP.pdf644.18 KB