CL 610154 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.: CL 610154-RT
WALTER NOHAR, DRO DOCKET NO.: BA 630039-OM
Premises: 1255 Stratford Ave.
PETITIONER Apt. E7, Bronx, NY
------------------------------------X
ORDER AND OPINION DENYING PETITION FOR ADMINISTRATIVE REVIEW
The above-named tenant timely filed a Petition for Administrative
Review of an order issued concerning the housing accommodations
relating to the above described docket number.
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 petition.
The owner commenced the proceeding below by filing an application
for a rent increase based on various major capital improvements,
to wit-boiler/burner, intercom system, lobby and vestibule doors,
elevator upgrading.
Each tenant was served with a copy of the owner's application and
was afforded an opportunity to review it and comment thereupon.
The petitioner-tenant did not file an objection to the owner's
application although afforded the opportunity to do so.
Thereafter, the Rent Administrator issued the order here under
review finding that the installation qualified as a major capital
improvement, determining that the application complied with the
relevant laws and regulations based upon the supporting documenta
tion submitted by the owner, and allowing appropriate rent in
creases. The Rent Administrator disallowed an increase based upon
elevator upgrading.
In his petition for administrative review, the tenant requests
reversal of the Rent Administrator's order and alleges, that there
is no elevator service and is unsafe to use after repairs, have
been made, that the intercom is of no use when the doors are left
open and both are regularly out of service.
The owner interposed an answer to the tenant's petition contend
ing, that the elevator service has been upgraded and the viola
tions have been dismissed, that the doors and intercom improve
CL 610154 RT
security for the tenants and improve building safety at the
premises.
The tenant interposed a response to the owner's answer alleging
that the elevator is constantly being repaired, that the elevator
service is inadequate, that replacement of the boiler/burner was
required since the tenant's have been without heat and hot water.
The petitioner agrees that the doors and intercom add security,
however, the doors and intercom do not operate properly or are
frequently out of service.
Subsequently, the owner interposed a rebuttal to the tenant's
response contending, that the elevator has been upgraded and can
be substantiated with receipts or by inspection, that the tenant
acknowledged that a new boiler/burner was needed and installed.
After careful consideration the Commissioner is of the opinion
that this petition should be denied.
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, preserva
tion, 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 Commissioner will not entertain the tenant's assertions raised
for the first time on appeal, even though it was afforded an
opportunity to file an objection before the Administrator. The
record in the instant case indicates that the owner correctly
complied with application procedures for a major capital improve
ment and the Rent Administrator properly computed the appropriate
rent increases. The tenant has not established that the increase
should be revoked.
This order is issued without prejudice to the tenants right to
file an application for a rent reduction based on a decrease in
services, should the facts so warrant.
THEREFORE, in accordance with the Rent Stabilization Law and Code,
the Rent and Eviction Regulations for New York City, it is
ORDERED, that this petition be, and the same hereby is, denied and
that the Rent Administrator's order be, and the same hereby is,
affirmed.
ISSUED:
ELLIOT SANDER
Deputy Commissioner
|
