Landlord restored security guard service.
(Decision submitted by James R. Marino of the Manhattan law firm of Kucker & Bruh, LLP, attorneys for the landlord.)
Tenants complained of a reduction in building-wide services. The DRA ruled for tenants, finding that landlord wasn't providing security services. Landlord later asked for rent restoration based on the restoration of services. The DRA ruled against landlord. Landlord then signed a settlement agreement with tenants and filed an application to decrease or modify services. The DRA granted landlord's application, noting that landlord and tenants agreed that the security guard be located so that he could see and be seen at two spots within view of the front gate of the building. Landlord then filed a second rent restoration application, which the DRA granted. Tenants appealed, claiming that landlord wasn't complying with the settlement agreement.
The DHCR ruled against tenants. A DHCR inspector observed a security guard sitting at a security station designated as one of the two viewing spots in the agreement between landlord and tenants.
* Graham Court Tenants' Assn.: DHCR Adm. Rev. Docket Nos. XB430036RT, XB430043RT (7/10/09) [3-pg. doc.]