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.: EG 930369-RT
                                         :  
       VARIOUS TENANTS                      DRO DOCKET NO.: WCH-8-1-0009-OM
       c/o VALERIE FLAMBERG
                           PETITIONER    : 
     ------------------------------------X                             


           ORDER AND OPINION DENYING PETITION FOR ADMINISTRATIVE REVIEW


     On  July  12,  1990  the  above-named  petitioner-tenants  timely  refiled
     Petitions for Administrative Review against an order issued  on  July  31,
     1989 by the Rent Administrator, 92-31 Union Hall Street, Jamaica, New York 
     concerning housing accommodations known as 325 Main Street, White  Plains,
     New York, Various Apartments, wherein the Administrator authorized a major 
     capital improvement rent increase adjustment on the 1986  installation  of
     replacement roof.

     The instant matter stems from an application filed with  the  Division  in
     May 1988.  Said application, based on the installation of a new  roof  was
     substantiated by a contract and cancelled checks showing  a  total  actual
     cost of $2,1500.00.

     In response thereto various tenant (6) alleged  among  other  things  that
     they had experienced water penetration in the past  due  to  the  age  and
     condition of the old roof; and that the work performed was in  the  nature
     of a necessary repair rather than a major capital improvement.

     On July 31, 1988  the  Administrator  issued  the  order  appealed  herein
     finding that  the  subject  installation  qualified  as  a  major  capital
     improvement consistent with the Regulations and past practices.

     In this  petition  for  administrative  review  the  tenants,  contend  in
     substance, that the owner had not installed a new roof but merely repaired 
     the old one by placing tar paper over the  existing  roof  surface.   That
     inadequate consideration was given to their responses  in  the  proceeding
     below wherein they questioned the quality of the work performed; and  that
     the case should be determined based on  the  merits  of  their  statements
     rather than on past procedure.

     In answer thereto the owner states, among other things  that  the  tenants
     should not be allowed to raise new objections  on  appeal;  and  that  the
     petition should be rejected as neither timely nor pertinent.

     After careful consideration of the entire record the  Commissioner  is  of
     the opinion that this petition should be denied.








          DOCKET NUMBER: EG 930369-RT
     It is established position of the Division that the installation of a  new
     roof consisting of  a  top  sheeting  over  the  existing  roof,  properly
     prepared to receive same, constitutes as  major  capital  improvement  for
     which a rent increase adjustment may be warranted (Accord: ART  9527-Q/ART
     9320-Q).  NOt only does the record confirm the new installing  but  it  is
     conceded by the tenant that the condition of the old roof  was  such  that
     its resurfacing was required for the continued operation, preservation and 
     maintenance of the structure.

     The tenants have raised unsubstantiated allegations regarding the  quality
     of the work  performed  but  fail  to  allege  with  any  specificity  the
     existence of any current roof leaks.  In this respect it is significant to 
     note that the records of the Division disclose that no service  complaints
     have been filed with respect to the condition of the roof or otherwise  in
     the five years which have  elapsed  since  the  new  roof  was  installed.
     Accordingly, the Commissioner finds that the Rent  Administrator  properly
     determined that there has been a major capital improvement for  which  the
     rents were appropriately increased based on the proven cost thereof.

     The landlord is hereby directed to correct any  defects  which  may  exist
     with respect to the roof installation after  receipt  of  specific  notice
     thereof from the tenants.  Upon the  landlord's  failure  to  do  so,  the
     determination herein is without prejudice to the right of the tenants,  or
     any one of them, to file an appropriate complaint with the Division for  a
     decrease in rent, if the facts now so warrant.

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

     ORDERED, that this petition be, and the same hereby is  deemed;  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