Docket Number: BB-520837-RT
                                 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 520837-RT
                                            :  
             ANTHONY KISSLING/                 DRO DOCKET NO.: LC  000063-OM
             PHILLIP MACTAGGART,            :

                              PETITIONER    :  TENANT: DONALD L. KLINGLER
        ------------------------------------X                           
          
           ORDER AND OPINION DENYING PETITION FOR ADMINISTRATIVE REVIEW

        On February 19, 1987, the above-named petitioner  filed  a  Petition
        for Administrative Review against an order  issued  on  January  19,
        1987, by the Rent Administrator 92-31 Union  Hall  Street,  Jamaica,
        New York, concerning the housing accommodation known as 17 West 64th 
        Street, New York, NY, wherein the Administrator determined that  the
        owner was entitled to an MCI rent increase.  

        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.

        The owner commenced this proceeding on June 19, 1984, by  filing  an
        application for an MCI rent increase based upon among other  things,
        the installation of adequate plumbing.   At  that  time,  the  owner
        certified service of a copy of the application upon the tenants.

        Several tenants challenged the  owner's  right  to  collect  a  rent
        increase for the subject improvements.   Some  tenants  stated  that
        some plumbing work had been done but not all the fixtures  had  been
        replaced.  Some  tenants  stated  that  they  did  not  possess  the
        requisite ability to comment on the adequacy of the work done.

        Subsequently, the Administrator issued the order herein appealed.

        On  appeal,  the  petitioner  contends  that  the  tenants  hired  a
        Professional Engineer to inspect the subject building.  In a  report
        dated March 31, 1982, the engineer stated that there  were  problems
        in the building's plumbing system, e.g. uninsulated sections of pipe 
        would cause moisture damage to the walls.  In addition,  the  tenant
        states that the cold water must run for many minutes before becoming 
        cold, a wasteful practice.

        Although afforded the opportunity  to  do  so,  the  owner  did  not
        respond to the petition.

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







          Docket Number: BB-520837-RT
        The  record  discloses  that  the  owner   substantiated   its   MCI
        application by submitting  to  the  Administrator  documentation  in
        support of the application, including  copies  of  the  contractor's
        certifications and the necessary government l  approvals  and  sign-
        offs for the work in  question.   Furthermore,  the  owner  filed  a
        certification of  service  of  the  application  upon  the  affected
        tenants.

        The  petitioner's  contentions  are  insufficient  to   negate   the
        Administrator's  findings  in  the  order  appealed   herein.    The
        Commissioner notes that the record indicates that the petitioner did 
        not object to the MCI  rent  increase  when  the  matter  was  being
        considered  by  the  Rent  Administrator.   Moreover,  although  the
        Professional Engineer's report was available, it was  not  submitted
        for consideration to the Administrator.  The scope of review  of  an
        appeal is limited to the facts and evidence which had been submitted 
        to the Administrator.

        Accordingly, on the basis of the entire evidence of  record,  it  is
        found that the Administrator's  order  was  correct  and  should  be
        affirmed.

        This order is issued without prejudice  to  the  tenant's  filing  a
        complaint of reduction in services, if the facts so warrant.

        THEREFORE, in accordance with the applicable provisions of the  Rent
        and Eviction Regulations, it is

        ORDERED, that this appeal 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