No Increase for Carpet and Hallway Vestibule Refurbishment

LVT Number: 18246

Landlord applied for MCI rent hikes based on the installation of a new roof, as well as for carpet and hallway/ vestibule refurbishment. The DRA granted landlord's application for the roof, but denied any rent hike for the other items. Landlord appealed, arguing that these items preserved the quality of the structure and were done in connection with a roof installation for which the DRA granted an MCI rent hike. The DHCR ruled against landlord. Carpeting and hallway/lobby refurbishment are cosmetic in nature, nonstructural, and not depreciable under the Internal Revenue Code.

Landlord applied for MCI rent hikes based on the installation of a new roof, as well as for carpet and hallway/ vestibule refurbishment. The DRA granted landlord's application for the roof, but denied any rent hike for the other items. Landlord appealed, arguing that these items preserved the quality of the structure and were done in connection with a roof installation for which the DRA granted an MCI rent hike. The DHCR ruled against landlord. Carpeting and hallway/lobby refurbishment are cosmetic in nature, nonstructural, and not depreciable under the Internal Revenue Code. And a roof installation has no connection with the carpeting and hallway refurbishment. So the DRA correctly disallowed any MCI rent hike for these items.

118 Remsen St.: DHCR Adm. Rev. Dckt. No. TC210042RO (6/16/05) [2-pg. doc.]

Downloads

TC210042RO.pdf102.47 KB