FE 610038-RT

                                  STATE OF NEW YORK
                      DIVISION OF HOUSING AND COMMUNITY RENEWAL
                            OFFICE OF RENT ADMINISTRATION
                                     GERTZ PLAZA
                               9-31 UNION HALL STREET
                               JAMAICA, NEW YORK 11433


          ----------------------------------x
          IN THE MATTER OF THE ADMINISTRATIVE     ADMINISTRATIVE REVIEW
          APPEAL OF                               DOCKET NO.:   
                                                  FE 610038-RT 
                     JAIME ZUNG,                  RENT ADMINISTRATOR'S
                                                  DOCKET NO.:
                                  PETITIONER      BG 630466-OM
          ----------------------------------x


            ORDER AND OPINION DENYING PETITION FOR ADMINISTRATIVE REVIEW   


          On May 2, 1991, the above-named tenant, refiled  a  petition  for
          administrative review of an order issued on February 6, 1991,  by
          a Rent Administrator concerning the housing accommodation,  known
          as Apartment 3-D, 2965 Valentine Avenue, Bronx, 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 July 27, 1987 by filing an 
          application for a rent increase based on maj r  capital  improve-
          ments, to wit - a new boiler/burner, new roof, pointing and steam 
          cleaning, and new windows at a total cost of $89,350.00.

          On August 8, 1988, and on February  15,  1990,  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.

          No tenants' answers were  received  after  the  initial  service.
          Subsequent notices mailed on  February  15,  1990  brought  three
          responses, alleging inadequate heat and hot water  and  defective
          windows.  The owner was notified of the complaint .   An  inspec-
          tion completed on December 10, 1990 revealed that  heat  and  hot
          water were adequate.


          On February 6, 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 controll d  and  rent  stabilized  apart-
          ments.  

          The Rent Administrator disallowed $8,630.50 of  the  total  costs







          FE 610038-RT
          claimed by the owner.
                         
          In his petition for administrative review,  the  tenant  requests
          reversal of the Rent Administrator's order and alleges  that  the
          new boiler breaks down and that there is no  heat  or  hot  water
          three times a month.

          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 mu t  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 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  ap-
          propriate rent increases.  The  Rent  Administrator  investigated
          the tenant's  claiming inadequate heat and hot water and found it 
          to be unsubstantiated based  on  the  inspector's  reports.   The
          tenant has not established that the increase should be revoked.

          This order and opinion is issued without prejudice to the 
          tenant's right to file a complaint based  upon  a  diminution  of
          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