No MCI Increase for Elevator Upgrade

LVT Number: #31007

Landlord applied for MCI rent hikes based on elevator upgrading. The DRA ruled against landlord, who appealed and lost. The DRA found that two of the building's eight apartments weren't served by the elevator and that the work therefore didn't benefit all building tenants. Landlord argued that occupants of those two apartments could still access the elevator by entering and passing through other apartments. But there was no provision in the Rent Stabilization Code to apply to what landlord called unique circumstances.

Landlord applied for MCI rent hikes based on elevator upgrading. The DRA ruled against landlord, who appealed and lost. The DRA found that two of the building's eight apartments weren't served by the elevator and that the work therefore didn't benefit all building tenants. Landlord argued that occupants of those two apartments could still access the elevator by entering and passing through other apartments. But there was no provision in the Rent Stabilization Code to apply to what landlord called unique circumstances. Any limited and irregular access to the elevator that could be provided to the two apartments by permission from other tenants didn't satisfy the requirement that the elevator serve all apartments. All building tenants weren't receiving a direct or indirect benefit from the elevator upgrade.

82 Thomas Street Realty Corp.: DHCR Adm. Rev. Docket No. FW410018RO (9/4/20) [1-pg. doc.]

Downloads

FW410018RO.pdf277 KB