STATE OF NEW YORK
                     DIVISION OF HOUSING AND COMMUNITY RENEWAL
                           OFFICE OF RENT ADMINISTRATION
                                    GERTZ PLAZA
                              92-31 UNION HALL STREET
                              JAMAICA, NEW YORK 11433

     ------------------------------------X 
     IN THE MATTER OF THE ADMINISTRATIVE :  ADMINISTRATIVE REVIEW
     APPEAL OF                              DOCKET NO.: BB 130480-RT
                                         :  
                                            RENT ADMINISTRATOR'S
       TERRIE J. TANNEHILL,                 DOCKET NO.: QCS 000992-OM
                           PETITIONER    : 
     ------------------------------------X                             

           ORDER AND OPINION DENYING PETITION FOR ADMINISTRATIVE REVIEW

     On February  18,  1987,  the  above-named  tenant  filed  a  Petition  for
     Administrative Review of an order issued on January 16, 1987,  by  a  Rent
     Administrator concerning the housing accommodations known as Apartment 23, 
     31-19 32nd Street, Astoria,  New  York,  wherein  the  Rent  Administrator
     determined that the owner was entitled to a rent increase based on a major 
     capital improvement.

     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 petition for administrative review.

     The owner commenced this proceeding on November  20,  1985  by  filing  an
     application for a rent increase based on a major capital  improvement,  to
     wit:  aluminum replacement windows (building-wide)  at  a  total  cost  of
     $22,080.00.

     The owner certified that on January 17, 1986 he served each tenant with  a
     copy of the application and placed one  copy  of  the  entire  application
     including all required supplements and supporting documentation  with  the
     resident superintendent of the subject building.  One tenant responded  to
     the application supporting the application.

     On January 16, 1987, the Rent Administrator issued the  order  here  under
     review finding that the window installation qualified as a  major  capital
     improvement, determining that the application complied with  the  relevant
     laws and regulations based upon the supporting documentation submitted  by
     the owner, and allowing appropriate rent  increases  for  rent  stabilized
     apartments.

     In the Petition for Administrative Review the tenant requests reversal  of
     the Rent Administrator's order and contends, in substance, that  she  paid
     an increase for a previous replacement of windows approximately four years 
     earlier, the useful life of which had not expired.  The  tenant  submitted
     with her petition, among other documents, a copy of a former CAB  decision
     (Docket  No.  59566-G)  granting  the  owner  a  rent  increase  for   the
     installation in her apartment of storm windows  and  linoleum  during  the
     period of vacancy before she took occupancy.  No  claim  is  made  by  the
     tenant herein that she did not receive notice of the owner's application.








          DOCKET NUMBER: BB 130480-RT
     In answer to the tenant's petition the owner alleges, in  substance,  that
     the 1981 installations cited in the tenant's petition were actually  storm
     windows and screens for four of six windows.

     After a careful consideration of the entire record, the Commissioner is of 
     the opinion that this petition should be denied.

     Section 2529.6 of the Rent Stabilization Code provides in pertinent  part,
     that the scope of administrative  review  is  limited  to  such  facts  or
     evidence as was before the Administrator as raised in the petition  unless
     the petitioner can establish that such issues could  not  reasonably  have
     been offered or raised in the proceeding prior  to  the  issuance  of  the
     Administrator's determination.

     There is no indication that the tenant could not have raised the issue  as
     to the prior installation of storm windows in the subject apartment before 
     the Administrator in the proceeding below nor has the petitioner submitted 
     any explanation for her failure to do so.  Accordingly, the  issue  sought
     to be raised by the petition is not within the scope of the Commissioner's 
     review of this proceeding and may not be considered on the merits.

     This order and opinion is issued without prejudice to the  tenant's  right
     to file a rent overcharge complaint wherein  the  matter  of  whether  the
     owner  is  collecting  excessive  rent  for  window  improvements  may  be
     addressed.

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

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

     ISSUED:










                                                                   
                                          JOSEPH A. D'AGOSTA
                                       Acting 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