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.:EB 430114-RT
                                          :  
         WALLACE BULLOCK                     RENT ADMINISTRATOR'S
      and VARIOUS TENANTS,                   DOCKET NO.:BF 430023-OM
                            PETITIONER    : 
      ------------------------------------X                             

            ORDER AND OPINION DENYING PETITION FOR ADMINISTRATIVE REVIEW

      The above named petitioners-tenants timely filed a petition for 
      Administrative Review against an order issued on January 16, 1990 by the 
      Rent Administrator, Gertz Plaza, Jamaica, New York, concerning housing 
      accommodations known as 230 East 7th Street AKA 102 Avenue C, New York, New 
      York, Various Apartments.

      The Rent Administrator's order, appealed herein, granted the owner's 
      application for a major capital improvement (MCI) rent increase based on 
      the installation of a new roof at a total approved cost of $2,055.16 and 
      contains the notation that only one tenant (Apt 5C) complained about leaks 
      and that a subsequent inquiry sent to that tenant did not elicit any 
      response.

      On appeal, the petitioners-tenants request a reversal of the 
      Administrator's order and contend, in substance, that contrary to the 
      statement in the order dated January 16, 1990, the tenant in Apt 5C never 
      received correspondence to confirm the owner's statement about the repair 
      of the leaks from the roof; that the tenant in Apartment 5D maintains that 
      the roof still leaks; that the tenant in Apt 3A has resided in the building 
      since August 1982 and never witnessed any repairs to the roof during 1987; 
      and that if work of any amount was done, it could not have been of 
      sufficient scope to only cost the owner $3,885.00.

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

      Rent increases for major capital improvements are authorized by Section 
      2522.4 of the Rent Stabilization Code for rent stabilized apartments.  
      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.








          DOCKET NUMBER: EB 430114-RT
      The petitioners' contention that the tenant in apartment 5C never received 
      correspondence to confirm the owner's statement about the repair of the 
      roof leaks is not supported by the record as evidenced by the fact that the 
      Division sent a properly addressed notice on December 4, 1989 to the tenant 
      in Apt 5C which was not returned by the U.S. Postal service.  The 
      Commissioner notes that there is no mention now in the petition that the 
      roof still leaks.

      In addition, a check of the Division's records further shows that in the 
      tenant of Apt 5D's response to the owner's application, that he confirmed 
      the roof was done and the leaking corrected.

      The Commissioner further notes that the petitioners' other contentions are 
      not relevant to the installation and do not constitute grounds to bar an 
      owner from obtaining a rent increase for a major capital improvement that 
      is otherwise warranted.

      The record further discloses that the owner substantiated its application 
      by submitting to the Administrator documentation in support of the 
      application, including a copy of the contract, invoice, contractor's 
      certification and cancelled checks for the work in question; and that the 
      Administrator properly determined the owner's application for a rent 
      increase for the installation of a new roof.

      THEREFORE, in accordance with the Rent Stabilization Law and Code, it is

      ORDERED, that the Administrative Appeal be, and the same hereby is denied; 
      and that the Administrator's order be, and the same hereby is affirmed.

      ISSUED:







                                                                    
                                           JOSEPH A. D'AGOSTA
                                       Acting 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