DOC. NOS. EC 810580-RT et al.
                                  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
          APPEALS OF                              DOCKET NOS.:
                                                              EC 810580-RT;
               VARIOUS TENANTS OF                             EC 810581-RT;
               56 PONDFIELD ROAD WEST,        :               EC 810582-RT;
                                  PETITIONER  :               EC 810583-RT;
          ------------------------------------X               EC 810585-RT;
                                                              EC 810586-RT;
                                                  DRO DOCKET NO.:
                                                            YCA-8-3-0012-OM

            ORDER AND OPINION DENYING PETITION FOR ADMINISTRATIVE REVIEW

          The above named petitioner-tenants filed timely Petitions for 
          Administrative Review against an order of the Rent Administrator 55 
          Church Street, White Plains, issued November 15, 1989.  The order 
          concerned housing accommodations located at 56 Pondfield Road West, 
          Yonkers, New York.  The Administrator granted a rent increase for 
          the installation of major capital improvements.

          The Commissioner has reviewed the record and carefully considered 
          that portion relevant to the issues presented by the administrative 
          appeals.  These proceedings are consolidated herein because they 
          involve common issues of law and fact.

          The owner commenced this proceeding on December 30, 1987, by filing 
          an application for a rent increase based on capital improvements.  
          Said improvements were the installation of:

                    1.   Thermal windows and screens

                    2.   Two entrance doors and

                    3.   New intercom system.

          On February 11, 1988, the owner certified that it served a copy of 
          Application Form RA-79, a copy of Notice Form RA-79N and three 
          copies of Answer Form RIT-3 on each tenant.  Various tenants 
          objected to the increase citing numerous violations outstanding on 
          the subject building at the time of the filing.  The owner 
          responded to these allegations by submitting a letter, dated 
          October 10, 1989, wherein the Yonkers Bureau of Housing and 
          Buildings advised that a records check indicated no outstanding 
          violations at that time.














          DOC. NOS. EC 810580-RT et al.


          The Administrator granted the application regarding the windows and 
          doors but denied it for the clear mirrors on the wall by the doors 
          and noted a $100.00 error in addition for the doors.  It was also 
          noted that the owner withdrew the request for the intercom.  The 
          Administrator increased the rent of each tenant by $1.24 per room, 
          per month and $3.04 per window per month and adjusted the Maximum 
          Legal Rent for each rent controlled apartment to reflect the second 
          stage increase pursuant to Sec. 33.8 Operational Bulletin #110, 
          Suppl. 8. ordered in docket #YCK-8-2-0004-AN.

          In the petitions for administrative review, the tenants assert that 
          there should be no rent increase for improvements made to correct 
          existing violations.

          After careful consideration, the Commissioner is of the opinion 
          that the petitions should be denied.

          The tenants' contention that improvements done to correct 
          violations should not warrant a rent increase is without merit.  
          Section 2502.4 of the Tenant Protection Regulations provides that 
          a landlord may file an application for a rent increase where there 
          has been since January 1, 1974 a major capital improvement required 
          for the operation, preservation or maintenance of the structure and 
          there has not been a prior rent adjustment based on the same 
          grounds.  Nothing prohibits a rent increase when an improvement is 
          made to correct violations and in fact the existence of such 
          violations serves to substantiate the need for the work that was 
          done.  (Accord: Heather Eichelbaum, ART 00384Q.)

          Although an owner must certify that he/she is maintaining services 
          and a rent reduction order based on a finding of a diminution of 
          services may render an MCI rent increase uncollectible, the 
          Commissioner notes that in this case the City of Yonkers certified 
          one month prior to the Administrator's decision that no violations 
          existed on the subject building.  The Administrator's order must be 
          affirmed.

          THEREFORE, in accordance with the Emergency Tenant Protection Act 
          and Tenant Protection Regulations, it is

          ORDERED, that these Petitions be, and the same hereby are, denied 
          and that the order of the Rent Administrator be, and the same 
          hereby is, affirmed.

          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