No MCI Increase for Piecemeal Walkway Installations

LVT Number: #22957

Landlord applied for MCI rent increases based on courtyard/wall and concrete walkway installations. The DRA ruled against landlord, finding that the work was piecemeal. Landlord appealed and lost. In a prior 2007 application, landlord sought an MCI increase for concrete resurfacing of the courtyard and retaining wall. The DRA ruled against landlord in that case because the entire original area within the property lines wasn't completely resurfaced with concrete. Later, after resurfacing the remainder of the courtyard and some walkways, landlord filed the new MCI application.

Landlord applied for MCI rent increases based on courtyard/wall and concrete walkway installations. The DRA ruled against landlord, finding that the work was piecemeal. Landlord appealed and lost. In a prior 2007 application, landlord sought an MCI increase for concrete resurfacing of the courtyard and retaining wall. The DRA ruled against landlord in that case because the entire original area within the property lines wasn't completely resurfaced with concrete. Later, after resurfacing the remainder of the courtyard and some walkways, landlord filed the new MCI application. But the earlier work was done more than seven months before the later work. Landlord didn't prove that it intended at the outset to perform a unified and consecutively timed MCI.

90-10 149 Street: DHCR Adm. Rev. Docket No. WG110037RO (7/8/10) [3-pg. doc.]

Downloads

WG110037RO.pdf95.96 KB