Tenant Didn't Prove Defective Conditions Still Existed

September 30, 2004

LVT Number: 17639

Tenant complained of a reduction in services. The DRA ruled for tenant and reduced her rent. Landlord later applied for rent restoration based on restoration of services. The DRA ruled for landlord. Tenant appealed, claiming that the kitchen was still infested with mice and roaches, the paint on the kitchen ceiling continued to flake and peel, the bedroom closet door needed a lock, and the kitchen cabinet door was unaligned and splintering. The DHCR ruled against tenant. The DHCR inspection confirmed landlord's claim that services had been restored.

Tenant complained of a reduction in services. The DRA ruled for tenant and reduced her rent. Landlord later applied for rent restoration based on restoration of services. The DRA ruled for landlord. Tenant appealed, claiming that the kitchen was still infested with mice and roaches, the paint on the kitchen ceiling continued to flake and peel, the bedroom closet door needed a lock, and the kitchen cabinet door was unaligned and splintering. The DHCR ruled against tenant. The DHCR inspection confirmed landlord's claim that services had been restored. And tenant didn't answer landlord's application to restore rent. She raised her claims only when she filed her PAR.

Baptist: DHCR Adm. Rev. Dckt. No. RA210023RT (5/19/04) [2-pg. doc.]

Downloads

RA210023RT.pdf141.04 KB

Topics

More like this