STATE OF NEW YORK
                           OFFICE OF RENT ADMINISTRATION
                                    GERTZ PLAZA
                              92-31 UNION HALL STREET
                              JAMAICA, NEW YORK 11433

     ------------------------------------X  SJR 5192
     APPEAL OF                              DOCKET NO.: DD 130236-RO
                                            DRO DOCKET NO.: CL 130235-OM
                           PETITIONER    : 


     On April  25,  1989  the  above  named  petitioner-owner/trustee  filed  a
     Petition for Administrative Review against an order issued  on  March  22,
     1980 by the District Rent Administrator, Gertz  Plaza  concerning  housing
     accommodations known as 83-43 118th  Street,  Queens,  New  York,  various
     apartments, wherein the Administrator denied the application for  a  major
     capital  improvement  rent  increase   adjustment   and   terminated   the

     This proceeding stems from an  application  filed  with  the  Division  in
     December 1988 by the petitioner herein,  as  trustee,  predicated  on  the
     following   items:    boiler/burner,concrete,intercom,plumbing,roof    and
     windows.    Submitted   with    the    application    were    contractors'
     certifications,  contracts,cancelled  checks  and   various   governmental
     approvals and sign-offs for the boiler/burner and plumbing installations.

     The order of the Administrator appealed herein denied the application  and
     terminated the proceeding (without  service  of  the  application  on  the
     tenants)  on  grounds  that  the  application  was  incomplete  since  the
     application failed  to  indicate  on  the  Contractor/Vendor  form  (RA-79
     Supplement I) whether there exists a relationship, financial or otherwise, 
     between the owner and the contractors who performed the work with  respect
     to three of six installations; and that the age of the boiler/burner which 
     was replaced was not specified therein.

     The Administrator's order further noted that where a contract  applies  to
     More than one building a separate rider should be submitted detailing  the
     size of each building and the cost and extent of the work performed as  to
     each; that half-rooms should be excluded from the application and the  age
     of the windows which had been replaced should also be provided.

     The Commissioner notes that a companion application (CL  130236-OM)  which
     pertains to an adjacent building is the subject of a separate petition  to
     administrative review to be determined under Docket No. DD 130238-RO.

     In  this  petition  for  administrative  review  the  owner  contends,  in
     substance, that it was error for the  Administrator  to  have  denied  the
     entire application based on the omission of certain information from the 

     initial  application;  that  said  order  is  contrary  to  long  standing
     processing procedure which is to afford an owner an opportunity to furnish

          DOCKET NUMBER: DD 130236-RO
     additional information and evidence; that the requirement  for  a  special
     rider where work covers more than one building is not to be found  in  the
     Rent  Stabilization  Code  but  the  owner  is  willing  to  qualify   its
     application  if  afforded  an  opportunity  to  do  so;   and   that   the
     installations performed qualify as major capital improvements.

     Various tenants responded to the petition urging the  affirmation  of  the
     Administrator's order.

     After a careful consideration of the entire record, the Commissioner is of 
     the opinion that this petition should be remanded  to  the  district  Rent
     Administrator for further processing in accordance herewith.

     Inherent in the Administrator's authority to pass on an application for  a
     rent increase adjustment is the right to  deny  or  reject  an  incomplete
     application.  The Administrator also has  the  authority  to  request  the
     submission of additional information and evidence deemed relevant to  such

     At the time the instant application was filed it was  the  policy  of  the
     Administrator to reject an incomplete application.  Currently  it  is  the
     policy of the Administrator to reject such application  without  prejudice
     to refiling (as in the matter cited by the owner on appeal).  In  view  of
     the substantial documentation submitted by the owner and since it  is  the
     Administrative rule to decide pending  cases  under  the  regulations  and
     procedures therein effect (unless undue hardship may flow  therefrom)  the
     Commissioner is of the opinion that this proceeding should be remanded  to
     the Rent Administrator for  such  further  processing  as  may  be  deemed
     warranted;  with  full  consideration  given  to  such   allegations   and
     contentions as  may  be  raised  by  the  parties  after  service  of  the
     application on the tenants.

     As to the effective date of any increase to which the owner may ultimately 
     be found entitled, Section 2522.2 of the Rent Stabilization Code  provides
     that an increase shall be effective the first rent payment  date  30  days
     after the application is filed, unless otherwise set forth in the order.

     Inasmuch as the owner has failed to offer any explanation for its  failure
     to respond to pertinent inquiries posed  on  the  Contractor/vendor  form,
     especially as it pertains to the relationship question and the age of  the
     removed heating system nor has it submitted this  information  on  appeal,
     the effective date of any rent increase as to stabilized apartments  shall
     be no earlier than July 1, 1989, the first rent payment date 60 days after 
     filing of this petition for  administrative  review,  provided  the  owner
     submits  to  the  administrator  in  a  timely  fashion  such   additional
     information and/or documentation as may be requested upon the remand.

     THEREFORE, in accordance with the provision of the Rent Stabilization Code 
     and the Rent and Eviction Regulations for New York City, it is

     ORDERED, that this petition for administrative review  be,  and  the  same
     hereby is granted to the extent of remanding this proceeding to  the  Rent
     Administrator for further processing in accordance  with  this  order  and
     opinion.  The order and determination of the administrator remains in full 
     force and effect until a new order is issued upon the remand.

          DOCKET NUMBER: DD 130236-RO


                                             ELLIOT SANDER
                                           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