BG 410185 RO

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

          APPEAL OF                              DOCKET NO. BG 410185 RO
                                              :  DRO DOCKET NO. TC-079083-G
               CHRIS WARWIN                      TENANT: RICHARD REICH

                                PETITIONER    : 


               On July 27, 1987, the above-named  petitioner-owner  filed  a
          Petition for Administrative Review against an order issued on July 
          3., 1987, by the Rent Administrator, 10 Columbus Circle, New York, 
          New York, concerning the housing accommodations known as 328  West
          101st Street, New York, New York, Apartment No.  4A,  wherein  the
          Rent Administrator determined that the owner had  overcharged  the

               The Commissioner notes that this proceeding was  filed  prior
          to April 1, 1984.  Sections 2526.1 (a) (4)  and 2521.1 (d) of  the
          Rent Stabilization Code (effective May  1,  1987)  governing  rent
          overcharge  and  fair  market  rent   proceedings   provide   that
          determination of these matters be  based  upon  the  law  or  code
          provisions  in  effect  on  March  31,  1984.   Therefore,  unless
          otherwise  indicated,  reference   to   Sections   of   the   Rent
          Stabilization Code (Code) contained herein  are  to  the  Code  in
          effect on April 30, 1987.

               The Administrative Appeal is being determined pursuant to the 
          provisions of Section 20C(1)  of  the  former  Rent  Stabilization

               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  by  the  filing  in
          November 1983, of a rent overcharge complaint by  the  tenant  who
          first moved to the subject apartment on December  15,  1980  at  a
          rental of $400.00 per month.

               The owner was served with a copy of  the  complaint  and  was
          directed to submit a  complete  rental  history  for  the  subject
          apartment from the base date including copies of all leases.   The
          owner submitted a complete rental history including copies of 

          BG 410185 RO

          bills and invoices showing it made expenditures totalling $2740.00 
          in  renovations  and  improvements  in   the   subject   apartment
          immediately   prior   to   occupancy   by   the   tenant   herein.
          Subsequently, the tenant  advised  that  he  had  moved  from  the
          subject apartment. 

               In Order Number CDR 30,759, the Rent Administrator determined 
          that the owner had collected a rent overcharge of $456.66  through
          November 30, 1983, determined the lawful  stabilization  rent  was
          $403.34 effective December 1, 1982,  and  directed  the  owner  to
          refund the overcharge  to  the  tenant.   The  Rent  Administrator
          permitted the owner a rent increase of $54.63 due to  improvements
          totalling $2185.00, but  disallowed  a  rent  increase  for  other
          improvements  totalling  $555.00  -  repairing  the  kitchen   and
          bedroom floors and the installation of a toilet with a seat.

               In this petition, the owner  alleges  in  substance  that  it
          should have been allowed an additional  rent  increase  of  $13.88
          (1/40th of the total cost of $555.00) for the  installation  of  a
          bedroom floor and carpet, a kitchen floor and  carpet  and  a  new
          toilet and seat.  The owner further alleges that the  tenant  left
          "a mess" in the subject apartment which cost $50.00  to  clean  up
          and also kept a set of keys  costing  $7.00  so  that  the  tenant
          should be ordered to pay the owner $57.00.

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

               Section 20C(1) of the former Rent Stabilization Code provides 
          in pertinent part that due to the installation of new equipment or 
          improvements  in  a  particular   dwelling   unit,   the   monthly
          stabilization rent shall be increase by 1/40th of the  total  cost
          provided however that  such  increase  shall  not  be  collectible
          during the term of a lease then in effect or any  renewal  thereof
          except upon written consent of the tenant.  Tenant consent is  not
          necessary  for installations made  when  the  particular  dwelling
          unit is vacant.

               In the instant case, an examination of the records  including
          the contractor's statement submitted by the owner  discloses  that
          the bedroom floor work consisted of  "repair  flooring  and  close
          hole around radiator pipes.  Install linoleum carpet.  Finish with 
          quarter-round molding along walls."; that the kitchen  floor  work
          consisted of "install waterproof plywood floor.  Apply vinyl tile. 
          Finish with quarter-round molding along walls".  The  Commissioner
          is of the opinion that such work amounts to  ordinary  repair  and
          maintenance work for which a Section 20C(1) rent increase  is  not
          warranted.  Further the installation of a new bathroom toilet  and
          seat is considered the maintenance  of  a  service  the  owner  is
          required to supply and also does not qualify for a Section  20C(1)
          rent increase.  Accordingly, the Rent  Administrator's  order  was

               With regard to the owner's contention that the tenant  should

          BG 410185 RO
          be ordered to pay $57.00 due to damage occurring when  the  tenant
          vacated the subject apartment, the  Commissioner  notes  that  the
          DHCR has no jurisdiction over this issue and it may be adjudicated 
          in court.
               Because this determination concerns lawful rents only through 
          November 30, 1983, the owner is  cautioned  to  adjust  subsequent
          rents to an amount no greater than that  determined  by  the  Rent
          Administrator's order plus any lawful increases  and  to  register
          any adjusted rents with this order and opinion being given as  the
          explanation for the adjustment.

               This order may upon the expiration of the period in which the 
          owner may institute a proceeding pursuant to  Article  78  of  the
          Civil Practice Law and Rules, be filed and enforced as a judgment. 

               A copy of this order is being  sent  to  the  tenant  now  in
          occupancy at the subject apartment.

               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.


                                          ELLIOT SANDER
                                          Deputy Commissioner


          BG 410185 RO


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