BI 130193 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. BI 130193 RT
:DRO DOCKET NO. Z-QS000939-OM
VARIOUS TENANTS OF 209-10 41ST AVE.
ORDER AND OPINION DENYING PETITION FOR ADMINISTRATIVE REVIEW
On August 31, 1987, the above-named petitioner-tenants filed
a Petition for Administrative Review against an order issued on
July 29, 1987, by a Rent Administrator, concerning the housing
accommodations known as 209-10 41st Avenue, Brooklyn, New York,
Various Apartments, wherein the Rent Administrator determined that
the owner was entitled to a rent increase based on a major capital
The Administrative Appeal is being determined pursuant to the
provisions of Section 2522.4 of the Rent Stabilization Code.
The issue herein is whether the Rent Administrator's order
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.
The owner commenced this proceeding on January 15, 1986, by
filing an application for a rent increase based on a major
capital improvement, to wit: an oil burner and boiler and two
compactors. The owner also applied for an increase for black
topping the playground and landscaping but this was denied.
In support of its application, the owner submitted copies of
cancelled checks, contracts and invoices showing it made
expenditures totalling $30,800 for the installation of the boiler
and burner and the two compactors.
In answer to the application, the tenants stated in substance
that the burner and the two compactors had to be replaced because
they were constantly out of service and apparently could no longer
be repaired so that this work should be considered as necessary
replacements and not major capital improvements.
On July 29, 1987, the Rent Administrator issued the order
under review herein finding that the installation of the boiler
and burner and the two compactors qualified as a major capital
BI 130193 RT
improvement, determining that the application complied with the
relevant laws and regulations based upon the supporting
documentation submitted by the owner, and allowing appropriate
rent increases for rent stabilized apartments.
In this petition, the tenants allege in substance that
contrary to their answer below, they have no knowledge that the
boiler and burner and the two compactors were ever replaced but
that there is a strong possibility that these items were merely
The Commissioner is of the opinion that this petition should
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 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.
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 increases should be revoked and have made inconsistent
allegations in the proceeding before the Rent Administrator where
they claimed the improvements were made but should not be
considered major capital improvements, and at the appeal level
where they claim that perhaps only repairs were made and the new
equipment never installed. It is noted that the tenants have
submitted no evidence in support of their allegation on appeal
that the improvements were never made whereas the owner has
submitted all the required documentary evidence showing the
improvements were in fact made. Accordingly, the Rent
Administrator's order was warranted.
BI 130193 RT
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.