DOCKET NO.: DL 110001-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 110001-RT
: DISTRICT ADMINISTRATOR'S
SIMON HOLLANDER, DOCKET NO. ZBK 1100137-OI
: PREMISES: 215-40 47TH AVENUE
PETITIONER APT. 2B5
-------------------------------------X BAYSIDE, NY
ORDER AND OPINION DENYING PETITION FOR ADMINISTRATIVE REVIEW
The above-named tenant filed a timely petition for administrative review of
an order issued concerning the housing accommodations described above.
The Commissioner has reviewed all 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 this proceeding by filing an Application for rent
increase with the Administrator, said Application requesting a $5.00 per
month rent increase, based upon the tenant's installation of an air
conditioner in the subject premises which protruded beyond the building line
and "has damaged the owner's property". The owner stated on the application
that "Tenant acknowledges that he installed the above-referenced air
conditioner" and referred to an attached form, signed by the tenant, in
which the tenant conceded that he had installed a window air conditioner.
The tenant responded to the owner's application by averring that "I have not
agreed with the owner to any substantial increase" in services, and that the
air conditioner in question does not protrude beyond the building line. The
tenant's response was accompanied by a letter from the law firm of Jaffe and
Lynch said letter stating that the firm represented beside the tenant, all
other tenants at Rocky Hill Terrace, the development where the subject
apartment was located.
An inspection by a DHCR Inspector revealed that the tenant's one air
conditioner protruded beyond the building line.
In the order under appeal herein, the Administrator found that the tenant's
air conditioner protruded beyond the building line. The Administrator thus
granted the owner's request for a $5.00 per month rent increase.
On appeal, the tenant argues that he installed the air conditioner in
question during May, 1980, and that, according to DHCR Operational Bulletin
84-4, only those air conditioners installed on or after October 1, 1985 are
subject to a rent increase due to their protruding beyond the building line.
The Commissioner is of the opinion that this petition should be denied.
The tenant made the argument concerning the timing of the installation for
DOCKET NO.: DL 110001-RT
the first time on appeal, despite the fact that it was available to him
below. The Commissioner will not consider evidence presented de novo at the
Administrative Review level.
THEREFORE, in accordance with the provisions of the Rent Stabilization Code,
ORDERED, that this petition for administrative review be, and the same
hereby is, denied, and, that the order of the Rent Administrator's and the
same hereby is, affirmed.
JOSEPH A. D'AGOSTA
Acting Deputy Commissioner