DL 610253 RT
STATE OF NEW YORK
DIVISION OF HOUSING AND COMMUNITY RENEWAL
OFFICE OF RENT ADMINISTRATION
92-31 UNION HALL STREET
JAMAICA, NEW YORK 11433
IN THE MATTER OF THE ADMINISTRATIVE ADMINISTRATIVE REVIEW
APPEAL OF DOCKET NO.: DL 610253 RT
ALEX SPIEGEL, DRO DOCKET NO.: BG 610206-OM
Premises: 2960 Grand Concourse
PETITIONER Apt. 2B, Bronx, New York
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 a major capital improvements, to wit
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
In his petition for administrative review, the tenant requests
reversal of the Rent Administrator's order and asserts, that the
owner increased his rent by $483.00 over the last tenant's rent,
that he was required to carpet the apartment, that he contributed
money towards the painting of the apartment, and that there was
various decrease in services within the bathroom.
The owner interposed an answer to the tenant's petition contending
in pertinent part, that the tenant has not made any relevant
objection to the MCI order.
DL 610253 RT
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. The tenant was afforded an
opportunity to file an objection before the Administrator. The
record in the instant case indicates that the owner correctly
complied with applicable 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 upon a decrease in
services, should the facts so warrant.
In regard to the tenant's claim that the owner is collecting an
improper rent, the tenant is advised that the owner is liable for
damages pursuant to a rent overcharge complaint filed with this
Division. However, such collection does not constitute an error
in the Administrator's order here under review.
THEREFORE, in accordance with the Rent Stabilization Law Code, and
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,
JOSEPH A. D'AGOSTA