FC 220295-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 220295-RT
                    JOSEPH                                         ZOLOTOR,
                                                  RENT ADMINISTRATOR'S
                                                  DOCKET NO.:
                                  PETITIONER      CC 230090-OM
          ----------------------------------x


            ORDER AND OPINION DENYING PETITION FOR ADMINISTRATIVE REVIEW   


          On March 21, 1991 the above-named tenant, filed  a  petition  for
          administrative review of an order issued on March 14, 1991, by  a
          Rent Administrator concerning the housing accommodation, known as 
          Apartment 5-I, 28 Marine Avenue, Brooklyn, New York, wherein  the
          Rent Administrator determined that the owner was  entitled  to  a
          rent increase based on major capital improvements (MCI).

          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 March 14, 1988  by  filing
          an application  for  a  rent  increase  based  on  major  capital
          improvements, to wit - a new roof and a fuel storage  tank  at  a
          total cost of $117,690.00.

          On August 5, 1988, 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 did not file an objection to the  owner's  application
          although afforded the opportunity to do so.




          On March 14, 1991, the Rent Administrator issued the  order  here
          under review finding that the installations  qualified  as  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 controlled  and  rent  stabilized  apart-
          ments.  
                         
          The Rent Administrator disallowed  the  $465.00  architect's  fee







          FC 220295-RT
          claimed by the owner.

          In his petition for administrative review,  the  tenant  requests
          reversal of the Rent Administrator's order and alleges that there 
          exist leaks in his apartment.

          In answer to the tenant's petition the  owner  alleges  that  the
          leak in the tenant's apartment was unrelated to the ro f  instal-
          lation but was caused by a need for pointing which has since been 
          carried out.

          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 2202.4 of the Rent  and  Eviction  Regulations  for  rent
          controlled  apartments.   Under  rent  control,  an  increase  is
          warranted where there has been since July 1, 1970 a major capital 
          improvement required for the operation, preservation, or mainten 
          ance of the structure. 

          The Commissioner notes that this tenant did not raise a y  objec-
          tion to the owner's application when this proceeding was  pending
          before the Rent Administrator when leak  allegations  could  have
          been investigated, inspections carried  out,  and  defects  cured
          prior to the granting of any  rent  increases.   Accordingly  the
          Commissioner finds, based on prior administrative  determinations
          under the Rent and Eviction  Regulations,  that  the  allegations
          made now for the first time on administrative appeal may  not  be
          considered herein.

          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  based  on  a  diminution  of
          services if the facts so warrant.


          THEREFORE, in accordance with the Rent & Eviction Regulations for 
          New York City, 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 220295-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