No MCI Rent Hike Since Mailboxes Not Relocated

LVT Number: #20783

Landlord applied for MCI rent hikes based on the installation of new tenant mailboxes. The DRA ruled against landlord because the mailboxes were installed in the same location, the inner vestibule, as the old mailboxes. Landlord appealed, arguing that the new mailboxes were significantly bigger than the old mailboxes and were installed at the request of the U.S. Post Office and tenants. Additional space was needed for the number of new mailboxes, and they were installed on two different walls of the inner vestibule. The DHCR ruled against landlord.

Landlord applied for MCI rent hikes based on the installation of new tenant mailboxes. The DRA ruled against landlord because the mailboxes were installed in the same location, the inner vestibule, as the old mailboxes. Landlord appealed, arguing that the new mailboxes were significantly bigger than the old mailboxes and were installed at the request of the U.S. Post Office and tenants. Additional space was needed for the number of new mailboxes, and they were installed on two different walls of the inner vestibule. The DHCR ruled against landlord. It is the DHCR's established position that mailboxes aren't an MCI unless they are relocated to a more secure inner area behind locked areas. Since landlord placed new mailboxes in the same general location as the old mailboxes in the inner vestibule, the work didn't qualify as an MCI.

119-121 Elizabeth Street: DHCR Adm. Rev. Docket No. WC430038RO (8/14/08) [2-pg. doc.]

Downloads

WC430038RO.pdf300.53 KB