DHCR Petition for Administrative Review (PAR) Decisions
In 1994, under pressure from tenant advocates, DHCR released approximately 6,000 PAR decisions. After Governor Pataki took office in 1995, DHCR refused to release other decisions in bulk. These decisions generally cover the 1990-1994 period and in many cases do not reflect current law or DHCR practice. The reader is cautioned to be aware of changes to the Rent Stabilization Law, the Rent Stabilization Code and DHCR practice since 1994. Also this database does not include all decisions prior to 1994 as DHCR intentionally withheld many decisions for unknown reasons.

Accessing the decisions

Search DHCR decisions by keyword

 

Note: Search must contain at least four characters.

    Contains all words
    Contains the exact phrase
    Contains at least one word
   or ... Browse decisions by docket number
   or ... Download compressed zip files of all decisions


DHCR Decisions








          FC 110246-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 110246-RT
                       K.J.                                            AHN,
                                                  RENT ADMINISTRATOR'S
                                                  DOCKET NO.:
                                  PETITIONER      CC 130229-OM
          ----------------------------------x


            ORDER AND OPINION DENYING PETITION FOR ADMINISTRATIVE REVIEW   


          On March 14, 1991, the above-named tenant, filed a  petition  for
          administrative review of an order issued on March 5, 1991,  by  a
          Rent Administrator concerning the housing accommodation, known as 
          Apartment 2-F, 48-14 48th Street, Woodside, 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 29, 1988  by  filing
          an application  for  a  rent  increase  based  on  major  capital
          improvements, to wit - windows, doors, link fence, roof,  mailbox
          and intercom at a total cost of $12,702.00.

          On September 22, 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 of Apartment 2-F did not  file  an  objection  to  the
          owner's application although afforded the opportunity to do so.






          On March 5, 1991, the Rent Administrator issued  the  order  here
          under review finding that some 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 stabilized apartments.  

          The Administrator disallowed any rent increases  based  upon  the







          FC 110246-RT
          installation of mailboxes and the chain link fence.

          In the petition for administrative review,  the  tenant  requests
          reversal of the Rent Administrator's order and alleges inter alia 
          that the prior owner had replaced  the  old  windows  with  storm
          windows only two months prior to the  current  owner's  installa-
          tions.

          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  gen-
          erally be building-wide; depreciable under the  Internal  Revenue
          Code, other than for ordinary repairs; required  for  the  opera-
          tion, preservation, and maintenance of the structure; and replace 
          an item whose useful life has expired.

          The Commissioner notes that  the  tenant  did  not  interpose  an
          objection to the owner's application while  this  proceeding  was
          pending before Rent Administrator althou h  afforded  the  oppor-
          tunity to do so.  Accordingly, pursuant to Section 2529.6 of  the
          Rent Stabilization Code, the objections being raised 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.











          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 110246-RT

                                          
    
   

The New York State Division of Housing and Community Renewal (DHCR) is the state agency that administers the Rent Stabilization and Rent Control systems. DHCR has jurisdiction over many aspects of the landlord-tenant relationship, including the legal rent, the providing of various services and complaints of landlord harassment. In addition, landlords are able to apply to DHCR for increases in rent based on Major Capital Improvements or for other reasons.

Tenants and Landlords may initiate proceedings by filing complaints or applications with DHCR. After the agency collects evidence from both the tenant and landlord, it renders a decision by the District Rent Administrator (DRA) -- sometimes referred to as the District Rent Office (DRO).

Either party may then appeal the decision at the agency level by filing a Petition for Administrative Review (PAR) within 35 days. A PAR decision -- or sometimes called a Commissioner's Decision -- represents the final decision of the agency before parties may appeal in the state courts.

TenantNet Home | TenantNet Forum | New York Tenant Information | Contact Us
DHCR Information | DHCR Decisions | Housing Court Decisions | New York Rent Laws |

Subscribe to our Mailing List!
Your Email:   
Your Name: