DK 430016-RO
                                  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.: DK 430016-RO

               Norman Schwartz,                DISTRICT RENT ADMINISTRATOR
                                               DOCKET NO.: BK 530144-OM
                                   PETITIONER
          -----------------------------------X

              ORDER AND OPINION GRANTING ADMINISTRATIVE APPEAL IN PART
                         AND REMANDING PROCEEDING ON APPEAL

          On November 2, 1989 the  above-named  petitioner-owner  filed  an
          Administrative Appeal against an order issued  on  September  29,
          1989 by the District Rent Administrator  (Gertz  Plaza,  Jamaica,
          New York) concerning the housing  accommodations  known  as  1512
          Amsterdam Avenue, New York, New York, various apartments, wherein 
          the  Administrator  denied  the  owner's  application  for  major
          capital improvement (MCI) rent increases for the  controlled  and
          stabilized apartments  in  the  subject  premises  based  on  the
          installation of a new boiler/burner at the premises.

          The owner commenced  the  proceeding  below  by  filing  its  MCI
          application with the Administrator in November of 1987.  As  part
          of  the  application,  the  owner  submitted   the   contractor's
          certification (stating that the work was completed on December 4, 
          1985) and a copy of a letter from the City of New York Department 
          of Housing Preservation and Development (HPD) to the  tenants  of
          the subject premises, dated October 24, 1985.  The letter advised 
          the tenants that the HPD would grant  the  owner  an  Article  8A
          rehabilitation loan for the  installation  of  boiler/burner  and
          that an estimate of the resulting stabilized  rent  increase  was
          approximately $3.58 per room per month.

          On August 28, 1989, the  Administrator  requested  the  owner  to
          submit within 20 days a "rent cap letter" by HPD and the date  of
          completion of construction by HPD.

          The District Rent Administrator's order, appealed herein,  stated
          that the owner failed to submit information/evidence required for 
          the processing of the application.


          This order was  based  upon  the  owner's  purported  failure  to
          respond to the request of August 28, 1989.

          On appeal, the petitioner-owner contends, in substance, that  the
          material requested by the DHCR had been provided on two  previous
          occasions - November 24, 1987 and September 19, 1989.  In support 
          of his contention, the owner submitted copies of his response  to
          the Administrator (dated September 19, 1989) and  certified  mail
          receipts showing mailing date of September 20, 1989 and  delivery
          date of September 25, 1989.  With his response,  the  owner  also






          DK 430016-RO
          submitted the HPD letter dated October 25, 1985,  copies  of  HPD
          checks representing final payment after completion of  the  work,
          and the contractor's certification indicating that the  work  was
          completed on December 4, 1985.

          In response  to  the  owner's  petition,  various  tenants  filed
          answers stating, in substance, that the tenants continue to  have
          periods of no heat/hot water and that  there  are  other  service
          problems in the building.

          After a careful consideration of the entire  evidence  of  record
          the Commissioner is of the opinion that the administrative appeal 
          should be granted in part and this  proceeding  remanded  to  the
          Administrator for further  processing  in  accordance  with  this
          order and opinion.

          At the outset, the  Commissioner  notes  that  the  documentation
          submitted by the owner on this appeal indicates  that  the  owner
          submitted a response to the  Administrator's  request  four  days
          prior to the issuance of the Administrator's order.  Furthermore, 
          the owner submitted documentation in an attempt to establish  the
          date of completion of the work  herein.   Finally,  although  the
          HPD letter submitted by the  petitioner  does  not  constitute  a
          "rent cap letter" (the owner's agreement, if  any,  with  HPD  to
          limit the amount of MCI increases) the record does not indicate a 
          wilful  failure  by  the  owner  to  properly  respond   to   the
          Administrator's request for such a letter.  The Commissioner also 
          notes that even the non-existence of said agreement  between  the
          HPD and the owner would not necessarily  preclude  MCI  increases
          for the work in question.

          Thus, the Commissioner is of the  opinion  that  this  proceeding
          should  be  remanded  to  the  Administrator  for  such   further
          processing of the owner's  application  as  is  necessary.   This
          processing should also resolve any issues raised by the  tenants,
          including the issue of the heat/hot water services.

          THEREFORE, in accordance with the applicable  provisions  of  the
          Rent Stabilization Code, the Rent and  Eviction  Regulations  for
          New York City, and Operational Bulletin 84-1, it is

          ORDERED, that the Administrative appeal be, and the  same  hereby
          is granted to the extent of  remanding  this  proceeding  to  the
          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 remand.

          ISSUED:

                                                                           
                                                       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