Docket Number: BB-520837-RT
STATE OF NEW YORK
DIVISION OF HOUSING AND COMMUNITY RENEWAL
OFFICE OF RENT ADMINISTRATION
92-31 UNION HALL STREET
JAMAICA, NEW YORK 11433
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
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
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
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.