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.: BG 110273-RT
DRO DOCKET NO.: QCS 000795-OM
ORDER AND OPINION DENYING ADMINISTRATIVE APPEAL
On July 1, 1987 the above-named petitioner-tenant filed an Administrative
Appeal against an order issued on June 17, 1987 by the District Rent
Administrator, 92-31 Union Hall Street, Jamaica, New York, concerning the
housing accommodations known as 36-07 Steinway Street, Long Island City,
New York, Apartment 1C.
The appealed order of the District Rent Administrator determined that
certain specified installations qualified as major capital improvements
(MCI's), excepting electric switch and water services, which did not
constitute MCI's and chimney improvements and waterproofing, which lacked
supporting expenditure documentation. All other installations were found
to have complied with the relevant laws and regulations, based upon the
supporting documentation and appropriate rent increases were, therefore,
granted for rent controlled and rent stabilized apartments.
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.
In this petition, the tenant contends, in substance, that the owner did
not do the work, as stated, at the District Rent Office level and that the
appealed order should be revoked.
In response, the owner stated that the petitioner's allegations are
baseless and that the petition should be denied, because approved MCI rent
increases have been substantiated at the District Rent Office level.
The Commissioner is of the opinion that this petition should be denied.
The owner commenced the proceeding below, on June 20, 1985, by filing an
application to increase the rentals for rent controlled and rent
stabilized apartments, based on the installation of a MCI consisting of
improvements: new chimney and roof, new entrance doors, new burner, water
service, electric switch, waterproofing and roof supplies. The owner
claimed costs of $19,381.40 for this installation.
DOCKET NUMBER: BG 110273-RT
The owner certified, that on November 7, 1985, it served all affected
tenants with a copy of its application form RA-79, appropriate notices and
documents and further placed a copy of the entire application, including
all required supplements and supporting documentation with the resident
superintendent of the subject building.
None of the tenants responded to this notice.
A review of the record reveals that the owner properly filed the MCI
application in the proceeding below and no showing to the contrary was
made by the petitioner.
The Commissioner finds that the order of the District Rent Administrator
and the rent increase adjustments provided therein, were determined in
accordance with the established rules, regulations and administrative
procedures in effect at the time the work was performed, the applications
filed and the orders under appeal issued.
However, absent any response from the tenant to the owner's application,
there were no issues raised below; and therefore, none of the issues
raised in the petition are properly within the scope of review on appeal,
as they are raised for the first time on appeal.
This order is issued without prejudice to the tenant filing applications
with the Division for rent reductions, based on a decrease in services, if
the facts so warrant.
The Commissioner notes that in an order and opinion issued on May 31, 1991
under Docket No. BG 110093-RT, the Commissioner denied another tenant's
administrative appeal against the District Rent Administrator's order in
which similar objections were raised.
THEREFORE, in accordance with the provisions of the Rent and Eviction
Regulations for New York City and the Rent Stabilization Law and Code, it
ORDERED, that this administrative appeal be, and the same hereby is,
denied and the order of the District Rent Administrator be, and the same
hereby is, affirmed.