No Rent Reduction for Trash Smell in Lobby

LVT Number: #25791

Rent-stabilized tenant complained of a reduction in building-wide services. The DRA ruled for tenant and reduced her rent based on the finding by the DHCR's inspector that the lobby smelled of garbage. Landlord appealed and won. Landlord argued that there was no garbage problem and that the smell of garbage wasn't a basis for a rent reduction. Tenant had complained that the lobby garbage overflowed, was not properly contained, and smelled. The DHCR's inspector reported that there was a strong stench of garbage as soon as he entered the building.

Rent-stabilized tenant complained of a reduction in building-wide services. The DRA ruled for tenant and reduced her rent based on the finding by the DHCR's inspector that the lobby smelled of garbage. Landlord appealed and won. Landlord argued that there was no garbage problem and that the smell of garbage wasn't a basis for a rent reduction. Tenant had complained that the lobby garbage overflowed, was not properly contained, and smelled. The DHCR's inspector reported that there was a strong stench of garbage as soon as he entered the building. Garbage bins and recyclables were stored along the wall in the lobby. But the inspector's report and photographs showed that there was no overflowing trash, and that trash and recyclable containers all were closed and lined with plastic bags. The area looked clean and properly maintained. The DHCR agreed that the condition of odors in a garbage storage area wasn't grounds for a rent reduction where the area generally was clean and there was no improperly stored household trash.

430 Columbus Avenue: DHCR Adm. Rev. Docket No. BU410004RO (8/26/14) [2-pg. doc.]

Downloads

BU410004RO.pdf780.65 KB