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. BF 110232 RO
                                              :  DRO DOCKET NO. T/A 12120
               CINDERELLA REALTY  COMPANY          TENANT:  ANGEL  SEPULVEDA
                 

                                PETITIONER    : 
          ------------------------------------X 

            ORDER AND OPINION DENYING PETITION FOR ADMINISTRATIVE REVIEW


               On June 24, 1987, the above-named  petitioner-owner  filed  a
          Petition for Administrative Review against an order issued on  May
          29, 1987, by the Rent Administrator, 10 Columbus Circle, New York, 
          New York, concerning the housing  accommodations  known  as  40-71
          Elbertson Street, Queens, New York, Apartment No. B1, wherein  the
          Rent Administrator determined the fair market rent pursuant to the 
          special fair market rent guideline promulgated  by  the  New  York
          City Rent Guidelines Board for use in calculating fair market rent 
          appeals and an apartment comparability study.

               The Administrative Appeal is being determined pursuant to the 
          provisions of Section 2522.3 of the Rent Stabilization Code.

               The issue herein is whether the  Rent  Administrator's  order
          was warranted.

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

               This proceeding was originally commenced in January 1984,  by
          the filing of a fair market rent  adjustment  application  by  the
          tenant who first moved to the subject apartment on January 1, 1984 
          at a rental of $380.00 per month.

               The owner was served with a copy of the tenant's  application
          and afforded an opportunity to submit June 30, 1974 or  post  June
          30, 1974 comparability data for determining the fair  market  rent
          of the subject apartment. 

               In response the owner  submitted  sufficient  June  30,  1974
          rental data for Apt. E1 to be used as a comparable apartment.  The 
          owner also submitted copies of paid bills totalling  $1802.86  for
          the following improvements made in the subject  apartment  at  the
          time the tenant herein  took  occupancy  -  kitchen  cabinets  and
          countertop, kitchen sink, refrigerator and range.  The owner 

          BF 110232 RO









          further submitted a statement that it cost  $305.00  to  have  the
          above items installed but did not submit a copy of a paid bill  or
          cancelled check in support  of  this  item  although  directed  to
          submit such proof for an improvements  made.   The  tenant  stated
          that the superintendent installed the  aforementioned  items  with
          the tenant's assistance.

               In Order Number CDR 30,391, the Rent  ADministrator  adjusted
          the initial legal regulated rent by  establishing  a  fair  market
          rent of $339.57 effective January 1, 1984.  Such  rent  took  into
          account an allowance for the  improvements  but  not  the  claimed
          $305.00 installation cost and took  into  account  the  comparable
          rent of apartment E1.  Such comparable  rent  was  established  as
          $160.00 effective June 30, 1974 minus $25.00 due to a change  from
          electrical inclusion to exclusion = $135.00 and  then  updated  by
          annual  guideline  increases  and  an  allowance  for  the  tenant
          herein's initial lease term to $307.41.   The  Rent  Administrator
          further found that an excess rent of $485.16 had been paid through 
          December 31, 1984, when the  tenant  herein  vacated  the  subject
          apartment.

               In this petition, the owner contends  in  substance  that  it
          should have been credited with a rent  increase  for  the  $305.00
          installation of the improvements and that the $25.00 rent decrease 
          for the electrical conversion should have been subtracted from the 
          1981 rent of the comparable apartment E1 since that  is  when  the
          electrical conversion took place rather than being subtracted from 
          the June 30, 1974 rent as was done by the Rent Administrator.   In
          support of its contentions,  the  owner  submitted  a  copy  of  a
          cancelled check made out to Victor Sentara in  January,  1984,  in
          the amount of $305.00.

               The Commissioner is of the opinion that this petition  should
          be denied.

               With regard to the installation cost of $305.00, it is  noted
          that the owner submitted a copy of a cancelled check for this item 
          for the first  time  on  appeal  and  that  such  evidence  cannot
          properly be considered since this is not  a  de  novo  proceeding.
          Accordingly, no rent increase  for  the  installation  costs   was
          warranted.

               With regard to the $25.00 rent decrease being taken from  the
          comparable apartment in 1974 rather than in 1981, it is noted that 
          the updating of the rents of comparable apartments is not based on 
          the actual rental histories of such apartments, but  is  based  on
          annual guideline increases up  to  the  date  of  the  complaining
          tenant's initial lease plus a  full  allowance  for  the  tenant's
          initial lease term.  This is done to reflect increased costs since 
          June 30, 1974 in order to obtain a comparable rent as of the  date
          if initial occupancy by the  complaining  tenant  of  the  subject
          apartment.  Since electricity was never included in the rent of


          BF 110232 RO









          the subject apartment during occupancy by the complaining  tenant,
          it is appropriate to exclude the  $25.00  rent  decrease  for  the
          comparable apartment (where electricity had been included  in  the
          rent) in 1974 before allowing the annual guideline increases since 
          the updating is not based on the  actual  rental  histories.   The
          Commissioner  notes  that  this  policy  was   followed   by   the
          Conciliation and Appeals Board, the agency formerly  charged  with
          enforcing the Rent Stabilization Law and Code - Cab Docket No. T/A 
          6410 issued on May 7, 1981.  Accordingly, the rent  of  comparable
          apartment E1 was correctly updated to $307.41.

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

               ORDERED, that this petition for administrative review be, and 
          the same hereby is, denied,  and,  that  the  order  of  the  Rent
          Administrator be, and the same hereby is, affirmed. 

          ISSUED



                                                                        
                                          ELLIOT SANDER
                                          Deputy Commissioner




                                                    
          ```````````````
























                            ADMINISTRATIVE REVIEW BUREAU
                                 COVERING MEMORANDUM










          ARB Docket No.: BF 110232 RO

          DRO Docket No/Order No.: T/A 12120

          Tenant(s): Angel Sepulveda

          Owner: Cinderella Realty Company

          Code Section: 2522.3 of RSC

          Premises: 40-71 Elbertson Street, Queens, New York, Apt. B1

          Order         and         Opinion         Denying         Petition
                           

               Petition  denied  on  basis  fair  market  rent  of   subject
          apartment was correctly established taking into  account  rent  of
          comparable apartment minus electrical adjustment due to conversion 
          of premises from electrical inclusion to exclusion.








          APPROVED:



          Processing Attorney:                                             

          Supervising Attorney:                                            

          Bureau Chief:                                                    

          Deputy Commissioner:                                             

          Mailed copies of Order and Determination to:
                           Tenant(s)                 
                           Owner                     
                           Tenant's Atty             
                           Owner's Atty              


                           Date:              :  by               
                                                    signature
                    


                                      





    

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