Landlord Didn't Replace Entire Roof

(Decision submitted by David Hershey-Webb of the Manhattan law firm of Himmelstein, McConnell, Gribben, Donoghue & Joseph, attorneys for the tenants.) Landlord applied for MCI rent hikes based on a roof installation and exterior restoration. The DRA ruled for landlord. Tenants appealed and won. Tenants claimed that landlord hadn't replaced the entire roof. Landlord argued that the roof to the vestibule and entrance lobby was on a different level than the rest of the building roof and, therefore, separate from the roof. The DHCR said that to qualify as an MCI, work must be completed on all similar components of a building unless landlord shows that some parts didn't require any work. The fact that the roofs were on different levels didn't matter. Together, the main roof and entrance lobby roof were part of a single roofing system for the building.

Various Tenants of 945 West End Ave.: DHCR Adm. Rev. Docket No. SI430084RT (2/8/07) [5-pg. doc.]