Resurfacing Qualifies

LVT Number: 15782

Landlord applied for MCI rent hikes based on the resurfacing of exterior building walls. The DRA ruled against landlord because only the front facade had been resurfaced and the rear facade hadn't been pointed. Landlord appealed, claiming that the rear facade had been pointed and showing that he had received a prior MCI rent increase for the pointing. The DHCR ruled for landlord. The resurfacing of the front facade was done in connection with the pointing of the rear facade.

Landlord applied for MCI rent hikes based on the resurfacing of exterior building walls. The DRA ruled against landlord because only the front facade had been resurfaced and the rear facade hadn't been pointed. Landlord appealed, claiming that the rear facade had been pointed and showing that he had received a prior MCI rent increase for the pointing. The DHCR ruled for landlord. The resurfacing of the front facade was done in connection with the pointing of the rear facade.

Parris: DHCR Admin. Rev. Dckt. No. QA230083RO (3/21/02) [4-pg. doc.]

Downloads

QA230083RO.pdf323.86 KB