Pointing and Waterproofing Work Was Sufficient

October 31, 2011

LVT Number: #23689

The DHCR granted landlord's MCI rent increase application for exterior restoration work. Tenants appealed and lost. They claimed that the work was incomplete because landlord did pointing and waterproofing on only the building's front facade. Tenants said that all sides of the building needed work. The court found that the DHCR's decision wasn't arbitrary or capricious. The DHCR reasonably determined that landlord had performed all needed exterior restoration work, which therefore qualified as an MCI.

The DHCR granted landlord's MCI rent increase application for exterior restoration work. Tenants appealed and lost. They claimed that the work was incomplete because landlord did pointing and waterproofing on only the building's front facade. Tenants said that all sides of the building needed work. The court found that the DHCR's decision wasn't arbitrary or capricious. The DHCR reasonably determined that landlord had performed all needed exterior restoration work, which therefore qualified as an MCI.

Tenants Committee of 36 Gramercy Park v. DHCR: Index No. 116069/10, NYLJ No. 1202518505867 (Sup. Ct. NY; 9/20/11; Stallman, J)

Topics

More like this