AI 410073-RO
                                  STATE OF NEW YORK
                            OFFICE OF RENT ADMINISTRATION
                                     GERTZ PLAZA
                               92-31 UNION HALL STREET
                               JAMAICA, NEW YORK 11433

          APPEAL OF                               DOCKET NO.:             
                                                  AI 410073-RO
                 LANYARD REALTY CO.               
            c/o   BERNARD  CHARLES,  INC.             RENT  ADMINISTRATOR'S
                                                  DOCKET NO.: 
                                  PETITIONER      L-000683-OI


          On September 17, 1986, the above-named petitioner-owner  filed  a
          Petition for Administrative Review against  an  order  issued  on
          August 13, 1986 by  the  Rent  Administrator,  92-31  Union  Hall
          Street, Jamaica, New York concerning the  housing  accommodations
          known as 47-49 Greenwich Avenue, New York, New York, Apartment 2. 

          The Commissioner has reviewed all of the evidence in  the  record
          and has carefully considered that portion of the record  relevant
          to the issues raised by the administrative appeal.

          This proceeding was commenced on November 6, 1985  by  the  owner
          filing an application for a rent increase based on  the  tenant's
          installation of two (2) air conditioners  n  the  subject  apart-

          In response, the tenant asserted that the air  conditioners  were
          already in the apartment when he signed his first lease  in  1977
          and that he did not consent to an increase.

          In answer to the tenant's response, the owner stated:

               1.  "At no time in our 28 year history of managing 
                    village apartments have we included air con- 
                    ditioning units in a residential apartment.

               2.   We have no reason to believe that (air condi- 
                    tioner) units were present when the current 
                    tenant took possession.

               3.   If in fact one or both of the air condi- 
                    tioners were present in the apartment when 
                    (the tenant) took possession, it was worked 
                    out with the prior tenant between the two 
                    tenants without our knowledge or consent."

          The owner further asserted that air conditioners were not  listed
          on the apartment registration among the  equipment  and  services

          AI 410073-RO
          provided by the owner and included in the rent.  

          In the herein appealed order, the Rent  Administrator  determined
          that the two air conditioners were  in  the  apartment  when  the
          tenant signed his first lease in 1977 and therefore the provision 
          of air conditioners was a service covered by the first lease  and
          all subsequent leases.

          In this petition, the owner contends, in substance, that the Rent 
          Administrator's decision implies that the  air  conditioners  are
          abandoned property and is therefore totally without  merit  since
          no inspection was conducted to determine the age of the a r  con-
          ditioners or their installation date.

          The Commissioner is of  opinion  that  this  petition  should  be

          Section 2525.2 of the Rent Stabilization Code requires  an  owner
          to maintain services, defined in Section 2520.6 as  the  services
          furnished or required to be furnished to  the  continuously  sta-
          bilized housing accommodation on May 31,1968, and all  additional
          services provided or required to be provided thereafter. The base 
          date for determining required individual  apartment  services  in
          apartments which were either vacancy destabilized or decontrolled 
          between July 1, 1971 and June 30, 1974 is May 29, 1974.

          In this case, the owner applied for a rental increase for two air 
          conditioners which it asserted were installed by the tenant.   In
          response, the tenant stated that the air conditioners were in the 
          apartment when he signed his first  lease  in  1977.   The  owner
          claims that if the air conditioners were in the subject apartment 
          when the tenant took  occupancy  they  were  left  by  the  prior
          tenant.  However, it is the owner's responsibility to inspect  an
          apartment upon its vacancy and dispose of any abandoned  property
          of a prior tenant.  Otherwise, absent specific lease disclaimers, 
          such property will be considered the property of  the  owner  and
          part of the apartment service to be provided any subsequent 
          tenants.  It is noted that a new tenant's decision to rent an 
          apartment may be partly based on his view of amenities in the 

          apartment prior to renting, such as  air  conditioners.   When  a
          former  tenant  abandons  property  within  an  apartment,   such
          property belongs to the owner.  If the  owner  chooses  to  leave
          such property in the apartment then upon rerenting,  it  must  be
          considered to be a service provided by the owner pursuant to  the
          Rent Stabilization Law and Code.  Accordingly, the Re t  adminis-
          trator correctly found that the provision of two air conditioners 
          is a required service.  

          The Commissioner notes that the subject tenant took occupancy  of
          the subject apartment in 1977 and the  owner  did  not  file  its
          application for a rental increase for the air conditioners  until
          1985.  The Commissioner finds that the owner thereby  waived  the
          right to collect an increase for the  air  conditioners  and  the
          Rent Administrator properly determined that such an increase  was
          not warranted.

          AI 410073-RO

          THEREFORE, in accordance with  the  Rent  Stabilization  Law  and
          Code, it is

          ORDERED, that this petition be, and the same hereby  is,  denied,
          and that the Rent Administrator's order be, and the  same  hereby
          is, affirmed.


                                                ELLIOT SANDER
                                                Deputy Commissioner


TenantNet Home | TenantNet Forum | New York Tenant Information
DHCR Information | DHCR Decisions | Housing Court Decisions | New York Rent Laws
Disclaimer | Privacy Policy | Contact Us

Subscribe to our Mailing List!
Your Email      Full Name