MCI Increase Revoked Because Penthouse Roofs Not Replaced

(Decision submitted by David Hershey-Webb of the Manhattan law firm of Himmelstein, McConell, Gribben, Donoghue & Joseph, LLP, attorneys for the tenants.)

The DRA granted landlord's application for MCI rent hikes based on the installation of a new roof and elevator upgrading. Landlord and tenants both appealed. Landlord claimed that certain items the DRA found ineligible qualified for inclusion in the MCI rent increase. Tenants claimed that the entire roof system wasn't replaced.

The DHCR ruled against landlord, finding that the useful life of earlier facade work hadn't expired and therefore no additional MCI increase for facade work was warranted. Lobby and hallway renovation work also claimed by landlord was ordinary maintenance and repair work, not an MCI.

The DHCR ruled for tenants in part. The building contained multiple roof sections, including a main roof and two small areas covering the penthouses. New roofing was installed only on the main roof area. The penthouse roofs weren't replaced with new material as part of the roof system. Therefore, the roof installation didn't qualify as an MCI and that portion of the MCI increase was revoked. The MCI increase was reduced from $19.10 to $9.18 per room.

Embassy House EAT LLC/Embassy House Rent Stabilized Tenants Association: DHCR Adm. Rev. Docket Nos. AQ410034RO, AQ410044RT (6/14/18) [3-pg. doc.]