BE 230344 RO
                                  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.:  BE 230344 RO
                     
                     STELLA CANNELLA,             DISTRICT RENT OFFICE
                                                  DOCKET NO.: KCS 000865 OM
                                                                              
                                PETITIONER
          ----------------------------------X


            ORDER AND OPINION DENYING PETITION FOR ADMINISTRATIVE REVIEW


          On May 20, 1987 above-named petitioner-owner filed a petition for 
          administrative review against an order issued on April  20,  1987
          by  the  District  Rent  Administrator  concerning  the   housing
          accommodations known as 139 Wilson  Avenue  Brooklyn,  New  York,
          wherein the Administrator denied the owner's  application  for  a
          rent increase based upon Major Capital Improvements (MCI's).

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

          The record reveals that on October 11, 1985,  the  owner  applied
          for an increase in the legal regulated rent based on expenditures 
          totalling  $15,300  for   various   improvements   done   between
          September, 1984 and September 1985 including:

               a new hot water tank ($1,300);

               resurfacing of exterior wall with stucco ($12,500); and

               a new roof ($1,500).

          The application was served on the tenants  on  May  1,  1986  and
          three tenants responded, asserting that no work had been done  on
          the building.



          On August 1, 1986, the owner was asked to submit proof of payment 
          consisting of either copies of cancelled checks, both  sides,  or
          if cash, an affidavit.

          In response, the owner submitted a copy of a "proposal" by N &  S
          Construction Inc. stating that  work  was  done  on  the  subject
          premises in September, 1984 and that $18,300 was paid in cash.

          The  Administrator's   order,   appealed   herein,   denied   the
          application, finding that the improvements had not been  properly






          BE 230344 RO
          substantiated by supporting documentation.

          In the petition for administrative review, the owner asserts that 
          the work was  done  and  that  all  requested  documentation  was
          submitted.

          After careful consideration, the Commissioner is of  the  opinion
          that the petition should be denied.

          In order to qualify for a rent increase based on an MCI, an owner 
          is required to submit proof of payment of the  work  done.   Such
          proof must consist of copies of cancelled checks  or  if  payment
          was made in cash, a contractor's affidavit or signed receipts  to
          establish the actual costs incurred.

          The owner herein failed to comply with these requirements despite 
          specific  requests  from   the   Administrator.    The   document
          submitted by the owner to establish proof of payment  is  neither
          an affidavit  nor  a  signed  receipt.   Moreover,  it  does  not
          identify the work done and states a time period other  than  what
          the owner had indicated in the application.

          Accordingly,  the  Commissioner  finds  that  the   Administrator
          properly denied the owner's application.

          THEREFORE, in accordance with the Rent Stabilization Law and  the
          Rent and Eviction Regulations of New York City, it is

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

          ISSUED:


                                                  ----------------------
                                                  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