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.: CK 210080-RT
                                         :  
                                            DRO DOCKET NO.: BC 210242-OM
       LOUVA IRVINE,
                           PETITIONER    : 
     ------------------------------------X                             

         ORDER AND OPINION GRANTING PETITION FOR ADMINISTRATIVE REVIEW AND
                          MODIFYING ADMINISTRATOR'S ORDER

     On November 1, 1988 the above-named petitioner-tenant filed a Petition for 
     Administrative Review against an order issued on September 27, 1988 by the 
     Rent Administrator, 92-31 Union Hall Street, Jamaica, New York  concerning
     housing accommodations known as 149 Brighton 11th  Street,  Brooklyn,  New
     York, Apartment 4-D, wherein the Administrator authorized a major  capital
     improvement rent increase of $6.10 per room, per month predicated  on  the
     installation (1986)  of  a  new  oil  burner  and  boiler  at  a  cost  of
     $39,500.00.

     The instant matter stemming from an application initially filed  with  the
     Division in March 1987, together with  various  supporting  documentation.
     The order of the Administrator appealed herein contains the notation  that
     one tenant objected to the application on the  grounds  of  hardship,  and
     that  subsequent  inquires  to  various  tenants  elicited  one   response
     acknowledging the installation of the heating system.

     In this petition for administrative review the  tenant  of  apartment  4-D
     contends, in substance, that the increase should  be  revoked  as  to  the
     subject apartment since at the time she negotiated her  lease  renewal  in
     August 1988 she was told by the owner that he would not  charge  her  with
     any capital improvement rent increase; that  the  instant  application  is
     defective in that Part IV thereof was not completed by the owner; that she 
     was refused permission, by the managing agent, to inspect the  application
     and supporting documentation; and that there is a discrepancy between  the
     number of rooms (128) listed in the application and the  number  of  rooms
     (108) utilized for computing the increase.

     No answer to the petition has been received from the owner.

     After careful consideration of the entire record, the Commissioner  is  of
     the opinion that this petition should be granted.

     The installation of a new  heating  system  constitutes  a  major  capital
     improvement for which a rent increase would normally  be  warranted.   The
     discrepancy in room count referred to in the petition  was  occasioned  by
     the Administrator's proper elimination of half-rooms which do not  qualify
     as rooms for stabilization purposes.








          DOCKET NUMBER: CK 210080-RT
     However,  the  record  confirms  that  the  application  served   on   the
     petitioner-tenant was incomplete on its  face  since  the  basis  for  the
     requested rent increase (boiler/burner) was not specified therein.  (While 
     the record indicates that various tenants were  subsequently  notified  by
     the Administrator as to the basis for the application, such notice was not 
     sent to the petitioner herein.)

     Moreover, the owner has not responded to the petition and has not  refuted
     the tenant's allegations that 1) she was  refused  permission  to  examine
     supporting documentation and 2) the owner agreed not to charge the  tenant
     for the major capital improvement.  As such the tenant's  allegations  are
     deemed admitted.  Under the circumstance herein, the  Commissioner  is  of
     the opinion and finds that the Administrator's order should be modified to 
     the extent of excluding the current tenant and all subsequent  tenants  of
     apartment 4-D from the increase provided for therein.

     THEREFORE, in accordance with the provisions  of  the  Rent  Stabilization
     Code, it is

     ORDERED, that this petition be, and the same hereby is granted;  that  the
     order of the Rent Administrator be, and the same hereby is modified to the 
     extent of excluding apartment 4-D from the effect thereof  as  hereinabove
     provided; and that as so modified said order be, and the  same  hereby  is
     affirmed; and it is further

     ORDERED, that the owner refund to the tenant of apartment 4-D  any  excess
     rent collected as a result of this order, within 30 days from the date  of
     issuance hereof.

     ISSUED:









                                                                   
                                     JOSEPH A. D'AGOSTA
                                     Deputy Commissioner




                                                   
    

TenantNet Home | TenantNet Forum | New York Tenant Information
DHCR Information | DHCR Decisions | Housing Court Decisions | New York Rent Laws
Disclaimer | Privacy Policy | Contact Us

Subscribe to our Mailing List!
Your Email      Full Name