DIVISION OF HOUSING AND COMMUNITY RENEWAL
                            OFFICE OF RENT ADMINISTRATION
                                     GERTZ PLAZA

                               92-31 UNION HALL STREET
                               JAMAICA, NEW YORK 11433

          ------------------------------------X   ADMINISTRATIVE REVIEW
          IN THE MATTER OF THE ADMINISTRATIVE     DOCKET NOS.: CB130207RT;
          APPEALS OF                                           CC110291RT    
             NORMA STRAUSS AND JULIAN                      
             J. PIMENTEL,
                                                  RENT ADMINISTRATOR'S
                               PETITIONERS        DOCKET NO.: AH110006OM 
          ------------------------------------X

            ORDER AND OPINION DENYING PETITIONS FOR ADMINISTRATIVE REVIEW

          On various dates the above-named petitioner-tenants filed petitions 
          for administrative review (PARs) of an order issued on February 3, 
          1988, by the Rent Administrator, concerning the housing 
          accommodations known as 31-16 68th Street, Woodside, NY, Apartments 
          4J and 4L, wherein the Administrator granted, in part, the owner's 
          application for a rent increase which was based on the installation 
          of various major capital improvements (MCIs).

          The Commissioner deems it appropriate to consolidate these 
          petitions for disposition since they pertain to the same order and 
          involve common issues of law and fact. 

          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 these administrative appeals.

          The owner commenced this proceeding on August 5, 1986, by filing an 
          application for a rent increase which was based on the installation 
          of an oil burner, heat timer, roof and pointing, at a total claimed 
          cost of $55,132.00.

          The tenants were served with a copy of the application and afforded 
          an opportunity to respond.  Several tenants did answer and either 
          conceded that the improvements had been made or raised no relevant 
          objection to the installations.  No answer was received from either 
          of the petitioners.

          In Docket No. AH110006OM, issued February 3, 1988, the Rent 
          Administrator partially approved the owner's MCI application by 
          authorizing a rent increase of $3.61 per room, per month, for all 
          rent controlled and rent stabilized apartments in the subject 
          building predicated on the installation of an oil burner, roof and 
          pointing, which work was found to qualify as an MCI.

          In these petitions for administrative review, the petitioners 












          ADMIN. REVIEW DOCKET NO. CB130207RT

          contend, in substance, that there are still many leaks throughout 
          the building, no one saw a new roof being installed and the 
          pointing work seems to be less than the owner claimed.

          The owner responded by submitting a statement from Norma Strauss, 
          Apartment 4J, stating that the pointing work had in fact been 
          performed and that she formally withdraws her petition for 
          administrative review.  The owner also responded that the 
          allegations of the other tenant, Julian J. Pimentel, Apartment 4L, 
          were untrue and that the owner submitted a complete MCI 
          application, complying with all state laws and containing all 
          required supporting documentation including city and state permits, 
          along with photographs of the roof and pointing installations.

          After a careful consideration of the entire record the Commissioner 
          is of the opinion that these petitions should be denied.

          The Commissioner notes that neither petitioner raised any 
          objections to the installations, while this proceeding was before 
          the Rent Administrator, although afforded the opportunity to do so.

          Accordingly, pursuant to Section 2529.6 of the Rent Stabilization 
          Code, the tenants' allegations may not be considered now when 
          offered for the first time on administrative appeal.  The 
          Commissioner further notes that the records of the Division 
          disclose that no heat or hot water complaints or other service 
          complaints were pending nor were there any orders of rent reduction 
          of a building-wide nature in effect as of the issuance date of the 
          order appealed herein.

          Based on the entire 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 Code, it is

          ORDERED, that these petitions be and the same hereby are, denied 
          and that the order of the Rent Administrator be, and hereby  is, 
          affirmed.   



          ISSUED:




                                                                          
                                                  LULA M. ANDERSON  
                                                  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