FC 230455-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 610361-RT;  
                   PEDRO                                             ALEJANDRO,
                                                  RENT          ADMINISTRATOR'S
                                                  DOCKET NO.: 
                                  PETITIONER      DF 630191-OM
          ----------------------------------x



            ORDER AND OPINION DENYING PETITION FOR ADMINISTRATIVE REVIEW   
                                          

          On March 25, 1991, the above-named tenant re-filed a petition for 
          administrative review of an order issued on January 4, 1991, by a 
          Rent Administrator concerning the housing accommodation, known as 
          Basement 2, 1125 Bryant Avenue, 1015 East  167th  Street,  Bronx,
          New York, wherein the  Rent  Administrator  determined  that  the
          owner was entitled to a rent  increase  based  on  major  capital
          improvements.

          The Commissioner has reviewed all of 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 June 23, 1989 by filing an 
          application for a rent increase based on maj r  capital  improve-
          ments to wit - a new roof and new entrance doors at a total  cost
          of $12,000.00.

          On September 15, 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 did not file an objection to the  owner's  application
          although afforded the opportunity to do so.



          On January 4, 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.  
                         







          FC 230455-RT
          In his petition for administrative review,  the  tenant  requests
          reversal of the Rent Administrator's order and  alleges  that  he
          has been approved for SCRIE benefits, that he did not request  or
          approve any  installations,  and  that  his  lease  has  not  yet
          expired.

          In answer to the tenant's petition  the  owner  states  that  all
          Senior Citizens that have a valid exemption are not  charged  for
          the MCI increase and that the owner wi l  collect  all  rent  in-
          creases in accordance with the Rent Stabilization Code.

          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 mu t  gen-
          erally 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 tenant is advised that no tenant permission  is  required  to
          qualify for an MCI rent increase and the increase is not  collec-
          tible during the term of an  unexpired  lease  unless  the  lease
          contains a provision expressly authorizing such an increase.  The 
          Commissioner notes that both parties agree  on  the  effect  that
          valid SCRIE benefits have on the collectibility of MCI increases.

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








          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









          FC 230455-RT
                                          
    

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