Prior Roof Repair No Bar to Increase

September 30, 2002

LVT Number: 16125

Landlord applied for MCI rent hikes based on the installation of a new roof. The DRA ruled for landlord. Tenant appealed, claiming that there was no proof that the useful life of the prior roof had been exhausted. And a court had ordered landlord to replace the roof. The DHCR ruled against tenant. There was no proof that the useful life of the replaced roof hadn't expired. The DHCR hadn't granted a prior rent hike for roof replacement. And landlord had merely repaired a small section of a roof extension three years earlier with insurance funds.

Landlord applied for MCI rent hikes based on the installation of a new roof. The DRA ruled for landlord. Tenant appealed, claiming that there was no proof that the useful life of the prior roof had been exhausted. And a court had ordered landlord to replace the roof. The DHCR ruled against tenant. There was no proof that the useful life of the replaced roof hadn't expired. The DHCR hadn't granted a prior rent hike for roof replacement. And landlord had merely repaired a small section of a roof extension three years earlier with insurance funds. Also, even if the work was done under court order, this didn't bar MCI increases.

Smollens: DHCR Admin. Rev. Dckt. No. KI430019RT (9/4/02) [2-pg. doc.]

Downloads

KI430019RT.pdf505.58 KB

Topics

More like this