Landlord's Application Was Timely in Light of Delay Caused by Defective Floor Coating

Landlord applied for MCI rent hikes based on exterior restoration with related professional services. The DRA ruled against landlord, finding that landlord hadn't filed its application within two years of completion of the work.

Landlord appealed and won. Although landlord's MCI application stated that the restoration work was undertaken pursuant to the NYC Facade Inspection Safety Program (FISP, a/k/a Local Law 11) and "substantially completed" by its contractor on May 23, 2014, the application also included a second statement by its engineer affirming landlord's claim that the work wasn't fully completed until June 2016.  As the weather turned cooler in 2014, landlord saw that cracking had occurred due to a manufacturing defect in the product used to coat the balcony floors. The subcontractor that had supplied the coating tested it in winter 2014 and then began to provide customers, including landlord, with repair programs in January 2015. The DOB also didn't issue its approval to start the corrective work until October 2015. The DHCR found that the corrective work performed on the balconies between May 2014 and June 2016 was necessary in order to properly complete the MCI. Landlord's MCI application therefore was timely, and the case was sent back to the DRA to calculate the MCI rent increases.

Rossmil Associates LP: DHCR Adm. Rev. Docket No. IM410050RO (2/28/24)[3-pg. document]