BL 210031-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.:
BL 210031-RT
HOWARD DAVIS,
RENT ADMINISTRATOR'S
DOCKET NO.:
PETITIONER AI 210195-OM
----------------------------------x
ORDER AND OPINION DENYING PETITION FOR ADMINISTRATIVE REVIEW
On December 2, 1987, the above-named petitioner-tenant filed an
Administrative Appeal against an order issued on November 23,
1987, by the District Rent Administrator, 92-31 Union Hall
Street, Jamaica, New York, concerning the housing accommodations
known as 207 Ocean Parkway, Brooklyn, N w York, various apart-
ments.
The issue herein is whether the District Rent Administrator prop
erly granted a Major Capital Improvement (MCI) rental increase
to the owner based on the owner's installation of building-wide
replacement windows and a bell and buzzer intercom.
The owner applied for a rent increase based upon major capital
improvements on August 29, 1986.
On April 7, 1987, the owner filed a Certification of Service of
Notice to Tenants of MCI Rent Increase Application, which
certified that the owner served the subject application on all
affected tenants and, in addition, made the application available
at the superintendent's office.
Ten of the sixty-two tenants of the subject building filed an-
swers to the owner's application in April 1987 alleging, inter
alia, that the owner did not paint around the window frames; that
the window locks are loose; that the owner did not obtain consent
for the installation; and that the superintendent did not make a
copy of the owner's application available to the tenants' associ
ation. The tenant of Apartment 3-G further alleged that the per
window increase granted by the District Rent Administrator is
excessive and untypical.
The District Rent Administrator's order, appealed herein, ap-
proved rental increases for the installation of aluminum replace
ment windows building-wide and a new intercom system. The rents
of rent stabilized housing accommodations were increased by $6.31
BL 210031-RT
per room, per month, predicated on a total approved MCI cost of
$77,.940.00.
On appeal, the petitioner-tenant alleges, in substance, that the
tenants were denied access to the owner's application; that the
new intercom system is of an inferior quality and that the
allowed costs therefor are unrealistically high; and that the
rent computations on the back of the District Rent Administra-
tor's order did not take into account three commercial tenants in
the building.
After a careful consideration of the entire evidence of record,
the Commissioner is of the opinion that the administrative appeal
should be denied.
The record, which includes responses from ten tenants below,
supports the owner's certification that all affected tenants in
the subject premises were duly served with notice of the owner's
application or had access to same and the Commissioner finds that
the tenants' responses were appropriately considered by the Dis-
trict Rent Administrator in determining the owner's application.
With regard to the tenants' allegations that the cost of the in-
stallation was excessive, the Commissioner notes that the owner
submitted documentation substantiating its payment of the actual
cost; that the tenants did not introduce any evidence in support
of their allegations that the costs were excessive; and that the
cost of the installation was not inconsistent with the costs
claimed by other owners for similar installations. In view of
the foregoing, it is the opinion of the Commissioner that further
investigation by the Division on the matter of costs is n t war-
ranted.
The Commissioner notes that the owner listed 63 apartments, in-
cluding three professional apartments, and the total number of
rooms in the subject premises as 206 on the MCI application.
The District Rent Administrator utilized the total number of
rooms figure of 206 in determining the per room increase. As the
number of rooms contained in the three professional apartments
was not deducted from the total number, each apartment was
ascribed its proportionate share of the total cost and the regu-
lated tenants cannot be found to have been prejudiced by this
method of calculation.
The Commissioner further notes that the tenants did not allege
improper installation of the bell and buzzer system before the
District Rent Administrator and such issue may not be raised for
the first time on appeal. In addition, the tenants failed to
show, on appeal, that the bell and buzzer intercom system is a
substandard system incapable of normal operation.
If, in fact, the system is in temporary disrepair this order and
opinion is issued without prejudice to the right of any affected
tenant to file a complaint of service decrease, seeking a rent
BL 210031-RT
reduction, in which the tenant may claim that the intercom system
installed in the premises is defective and not operating prop-
erly. If it is found that the intercom system in the premises is
defective, the tenant would be entitled to a rent reduction for
such service decrease.
THEREFORE, in accordance with the provisions of the Rent Stabili
zation Law and Code, it is
ORDERED, that this petition be, and the same hereby is, denied
and that the District Rent Administrator's order be, and the same
hereby is, affirmed.
ISSUED:
ELLIOT SANDER
Deputy Commissioner
|
