Revised (2/20) OB-2016-1 Page 3 of 7
any item requested, then an explanation must be provided and DHCR will determine whether the proof given
is sufficient.
B. Lump Sum Costs
When challenged about an IAI, such as in an overcharge proceeding, an owner must submit evidence of the
cost incurred for that particular item. Therefore, where an owner is seeking a rent increase for more than one
item of work, a lump sum bill may not suffice. DHCR has discretion to accept a lump sum bill under certain
circumstances where, for example, DHCR concludes that:
1. The evidence submitted establishes that all of the work claimed to have been done was as a
coordinated project and was satisfactorily completed; and
2. Each item of work was either an “improvement” or an ordinary repair and maintenance that
was done in connection with, and as a necessary component, of an allowable IAI.
Even such coordinated projects are best supported by itemized proof and the absence of such itemization,
may result in additional scrutiny or denial.
When proof is not adequate in DHCR’s view, such IAI increase may be denied in its entirety or the difference
between the claimed cost and the substantiated cost will be disallowed depending on the result of DHCR’s
review of the documentation.
II. USEFUL LIFE
The RSL provides that an owner who receives an increase for an IAI is not entitled to a further increase based
upon the installation of similar equipment or furniture within the useful life of such equipment or furniture.
Unlike major capital improvements, which have a useful life schedule in the RSC, DHCR’s determination of
whether an IAI’s useful life has been met will be based on the facts of each case.