FC 510460-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 510460-RT

                 KARL ST. CHARLES,                RENT ADMINISTRATOR'S
                                                  DOCKET NO.:
                                  PETITIONER      BL 430265-OM
          ----------------------------------x     


            ORDER AND OPINION DENYING PETITION FOR ADMINISTRATIVE REVIEW   


          On March 19, 1991, the above-named tenant, filed a  petition  for
          administrative review of an order issued on December 24, 1990, by 
          a Rent Administrator concerning the housing accommodation,  known
          as Apartment 4-D, 703 West 184th  Street,  New  York,  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  December  31,  1987  by
          filing an application for a rent increase based on major  capital
          improvements, at a total cost of $109,990.00.

          On April 15, 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 December 24, 1990, 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 controll d  and  rent  stabi-
          lized apartments.  The Rent Administrator disallowed $3,350.00 of 
          expenditures made for new entrance doors and  totally  disallowed
          $2,380.00 spent for new mailboxes.

          In his petition for administrative review,  the  tenant  requests
          reversal of the Rent Administrator's order and alleges defects in 
          the new installations.








          FC 510460-RT
          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 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.

          The Commissioner notes that this tenant raised no  objections  to
          the owner's application while this proceeding was pending  before
          the Rent Administrator although he was afforded  the  opportunity
          to do so.  Accordingly, the unsubstantiated objections he  raises
          now, for the first time on  administrative  review,  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  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:

                                                                           
                                                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