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
APPEALS OF DOCKET NOS.:BC510319RT/
: BC510318RT/BC510152RT/
VARIOUS TENANTS OF 545 WEST 164TH BC510151RT/BC510320RT
STREET, NEW YORK, NY
PETITIONERS : RENT ADMINISTRATOR'S
------------------------------------X DOCKET NO.: OM5950
ORDER AND OPINION DENYING PETITIONS FOR ADMINISTRATIVE REVIEW
DOCKET NOS. BC510318RT,BC510152RT AND BC510320RT AND GRANTING IN PART
PETITION FOR ADMINISTRATIVE REVIEW DOCKET NO. BC510319RT
The above-named petitioners timely filed Petitions for Administrative
Review against an order issued on February 28, 1986 by the Rent
Administrator (Gertz Plaza), concerning housing accommodations known as 545
West 164th Street, New York, various apartments, wherein the Administrator
authorized a major capital improvement rent increase adjustment based on
the installations of new thermal windows, a new roof, main and vestibule
doors, new intercom system, pointing/waterproofing and new elevator
including controller/selector.
The Commissioner has reviewed all of the evidence of record and has
carefully considered that portion of the record relevant to the issue
raised by the administrative appeals.
Five tenants filed administrative appeals against the Administrator's
order. These appeals are consolidated herein for a uniform determination
in this proceeding as all contain common issues of law and fact.
In these petitions the tenants do not question the propriety of the
Administrator's finding with respect to the quality of the work performed
but rather indicate that they were not informed of the proceeding below
until the owner made requests for payment based on the authorized rent
increase. Also, the tenant of apartment 2A alleges, in substance, that the
bedroom window is broken; and that essential services are not being
maintained in her apartment, and as result many items are defective and
inoperative.
After careful consideration the Commissioner is of the opinion that with
the exception of Administrative Review Docket No. BC510319RT, these
petitions should be denied.
Rent increases for major capital improvements are authorized by Section
2202.4 of the Rent and Eviction Regulations for rent controlled apartments
and Section 2522.4 of the Rent Stabilization Code for rent stabilized
apartments. Under rent control, an increase is warranted where there has
been since July 1, 1970 a major capital improvement required for the
operation, preservation or maintenance of the structure. Under Rent
Stabilization the improvement must generally be building-wide; depreciable
ADMIN. REVIEW DOCKET NO.: BC510319RT, et.al.
under the Internal Revenue Code, other than for ordinary repairs; required
for the operation, preservation, and maintenance of the structure; and
replace an item whose useful life has expired. Piecemeal work ordinary
repairs and maintenance does not constitute work for which a rent increase
adjustment is warrant under current and past procedures
At the outset the Commissioner notes that the owner certified in accordance
with procedures then in effect that on February 6, 1985, it served each
tenant with a copy of the application and placed a copy of the entire
application including all required supplements and supporting documentation
with the resident superintendent of the subject building. The record
confirms that notice was received as evidenced by a response to the
application from a tenant of the subject premises.
The record in the instant case indicates that the owner correctly complied
with the application procedures for a major capital improvement and the
Rent Administrator properly computed the appropriate rent increases. The
tenants have not established that the Administrator's order should be
revoked. However, the record confirms that apartment 2A was subject to
rent controlled at the time the application was filed; and that the
petitioner of said apartment (Linda Camilo) is the first stabilized tenant
thereof. Since the free market rent charged included any and all services
then being provided, the Commissioner is of the opinion and finds, in the
absence of a fair market rent appeal, that said tenant and all future
Stabilized tenants of apartment 2A are exempt from the rent increase
provided for in the Administrator's order. The owner is cautioned that a
violation of this provision could result in a rent overcharge
determination.
Regarding the tenant's allegation (apartment 2A) pertaining to items
needing repairs, the Commissioner notes that this order is issued without
prejudice to the petitioner's right to seek redress by filing a complaint
based upon a diminution in services, if the facts now so warrant.
On the basis of the evidence of record the Commissioner finds that the
Administrator's order is correct and should be affirmed.
THEREFORE, in accordance with the applicable provisions of the Rent
Stabilization Law and Code and the Rent and Eviction Regulations for New
York City, it is
ORDERED, that the petitions for administrative review under Docket Nos.
BC510318RT, BC510152RT, BC510151RT, BC410320RT be, and the same hereby are
denied; that the petition for administrative review under (Docket No.
BC510319RT) be, and the same hereby is granted in part; and that the
Administrator's order be, and the same hereby is modified by exempting
apartment 2A from the rent increase as of the date it first became subject
to rent stabilization jurisdiction; and that as so modified said
Administrator's order be, and the same hereby is affirmed, it is further
ADMIN. REVIEW DOCKET NO.: BC510319RT, et.al.
ORDERED, that the owner refund to the tenant of apartment 2A (Linda Camilo)
any excess rent which may have been collected as a result of this order,
within 30 days from the date of issuance thereof.
ISSUED:
JOSEPH A. D'AGOSTA
Deputy Commissioner
|
