Work on Retaining Walls Doesn't Qualify

April 30, 2003

LVT Number: 16517

Landlord applied for MCI rent hikes based on a number of improvements, including work on retaining walls around a seven-building complex. The DRA ruled against landlord. Landlord appealed and lost. Landlord's description of this work in its application was vague, and much of it was repair work. Landlord claimed the retaining wall work was done in connection with installation of new sidewalks and repaving. But the retaining wall work was done seven months before the other, qualifying MCI work.

Landlord applied for MCI rent hikes based on a number of improvements, including work on retaining walls around a seven-building complex. The DRA ruled against landlord. Landlord appealed and lost. Landlord's description of this work in its application was vague, and much of it was repair work. Landlord claimed the retaining wall work was done in connection with installation of new sidewalks and repaving. But the retaining wall work was done seven months before the other, qualifying MCI work. So it wasn't done in connection with an MCI and wasn't necessary for the preservation of the buildings.

Samson Mgmt. LLC/Vevette: DHCR Adm. Rev. Dckt. Nos. QA930014RO, QA930003RT, and PL930067RT (3/26/03) [20-pg. doc.]

Downloads

QA930014RO.pdf1.12 MB

Topics

More like this