FC 130477-RT

                                  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.:   
                                                  FC 130477-RT
                 HELENE FARRELL,                  RENT ADMINISTRATOR'S
                                                  DOCKET NOS.:
                                                  DE 130152-OM
                                  PETITIONER      DE 130153-OM
          ----------------------------------x     DE 130180-OM


            ORDER AND OPINION DENYING PETITION FOR ADMINISTRATIVE REVIEW   


          On March 26, 1991, the above-named tenant, refiled a petition for 
          administrative review of an order issued on January 24, 1991,  by
          a Rent Administrator concerning the housing  accommodation  known
          as Apartment 5-J, 60-52/72 Madison Street, Ridgewood,  New  York,
          wherein the Rent Administrator  determined  that  the  owner  was
          entitled to a rent increase based on major  capital  improvements
          (MCI), consisting of pointing, lintel  replacement,  new  boiler,
          asbestos removed, and a new roof.

          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 for review.

          The owner commenced this proceeding on May 22, 1989 by filing  an
          application for a rent increase based on major  capital  improve-
          ments, at a total cost of $164,350.00.

          On July 20, 1989, the Division of Housing and  Community  Renewal
          (DHCR) served each tenant with a  copy  of  the  application  and
          afforded the tenants the opportunity to  review  it  and  comment
          thereupon.

          The tenant filed an objection to the owner's application alleging 
          a severely damaged  kitchen  ceiling.   The  owner  indicated  on
          November 26, 1990 that repairs had been made.  A  subsequent  no-
          tice sent to the tenant was not answered.





          On January  24, 1991, the Rent  Administrator  issued  the  order
          here under review finding that the installations qualified  as  a
          major capital improvements, determining that the application 
          complied with the relevant laws and regulations  based  upon  the
          supporting documentation submitted by  the  owner,  and  allowing
          appropriate rent increases for rent controll d  and  rent  stabi-







          FC 130477-RT
          lized apartments.  No rent increases were allowed based upon  the
          painting of the fire escapes.

          In her petition for administrative review,  the  tenant  requests
          reversal of the Rent Administrator's order and alleges  that  she
          was unable to respond to advise the Rent Administrat r  that  re-
          pairs had not been made satisfactorily.

          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 2522.4 of the Rent Stabilization Law 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.

          The Commissioner notes that the tenant's allegati n  of  unsatis-
          factory repair is unsubstantiated.

          The record in the instant case indicates that the owner correctly 
          complied with the application  procedures  for  a  major  capital
          improvement and the  Rent  Administrator  properly  computed  the
          appropriate rent increases.  The tenant has not established  that
          the increase should be revoked.

          This order and opinion is issued without prejudice  to  the  ten-
          ant's right to file a complaint  of  decreased  services  if  the
          facts so warrant.















          THEREFORE, in accordance with  the  Rent  Stabilization  Law  and
          Code, 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, affirmed.


          ISSUED:


                                                                           







          FC 130477-RT
                                                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