Landlord v. Tenant: October 2016

September 23, 2016

Major Capital Improvements

MCI Rent Hike Granted for Building-Wide Carpet Installation

Landlord applied for MCI rent hikes based on building-wide carpet installation. The DRA ruled for landlord, and tenants appealed. Tenants argued that carpet was previously installed in 1995 and that the replaced carpet hadn’t outlived its useful life. But landlord had received no prior MCI rent hike for building-wide carpet installation. So the useful life of the pre-existing carpet didn’t matter.

Major Capital Improvements

MCI Rent Hike Granted for Building-Wide Carpet Installation

Landlord applied for MCI rent hikes based on building-wide carpet installation. The DRA ruled for landlord, and tenants appealed. Tenants argued that carpet was previously installed in 1995 and that the replaced carpet hadn’t outlived its useful life. But landlord had received no prior MCI rent hike for building-wide carpet installation. So the useful life of the pre-existing carpet didn’t matter. Tenants also argued that landlord replaced the carpet only as the result of a rent reduction order. But tenants didn’t raise this issue before the Rent Administrator.

  • 166 Second Avenue Tenants’ Assoc.: DHCR Adm. Rev. Docket No. CX430042RT (5/27/16)

Procedure—Court

Landlord Must Pay Tenant $4,600 for Discarding Possessions After Eviction

Former tenant sued landlord after he was evicted based on loss of personal property. The marshal removed tenant’s property from the apartment and stored it in landlord’s garage at the building. Tenant went to retrieve some of his things, left others, and told landlord he needed to return a few times to complete the property retrieval. Landlord refused tenant further access and discarded the remaining property. Tenant claimed that the items landlord threw out were worth more than $5,000. But the court’s arbitrator awarded tenant only $4,600 based on what he could prove. Landlord was responsible for negligent damage to tenant’s property because landlord became a bailee when it held tenant’s property after eviction.

  • Crawley v. Johnston: Index No. 2983/2015, NYLJ No. 1202761664465 (Civ. Ct. Queens; 5/30/16)

Rent Increase Ordered

Landlord Gets 1/40th Rent Increase for Painting Tenant’s Apartment

Landlord applied for a rent increase based on painting a rent-controlled tenant’s apartment, since painting wasn’t a service included in tenant’s rent. Landlord submitted copies of a contract and cancelled check showing that the paint job cost $9,920. The DRA ruled for landlord, although it reduced the allowable cost to $9,350, and increased tenant’s maximum collectible rent by $233.75 per month. Tenant appealed and lost. NYC Rent and Eviction Regulations Section 2202.4 allows the DHCR to grant a 1/40th rent increase for first-time painting. 

  • Parker: DHCR Adm. Rev. Docket No. DT420020RT (4/29/16)

Topics

More like this