STATE OF NEW YORK
DIVISION OF HOUSING AND COMMUNITY RENEWAL
OFFICE OF RENT ADMINISTRATION
9-31 UNION HALL STREET
JAMAICA, NEW YORK 11433
IN THE MATTER OF THE ADMINISTRATIVE ADMINISTRATIVE REVIEW
APPEAL OF DOCKET NO.:
JUDI COZZI, RENT ADMINISTRATOR'S
PETITIONER EA 630081-OM
ORDER AND OPINION DENYING PETITION FOR ADMINISTRATIVE REVIEW
On June 20, 1991, the above-named tenant, refiled a petition for
administrative review of an order issued on April 3, 1991, by a
Rent Administrator concerning the housing accommodation, known
as Apartment 7, 205 City Island 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 January 8, 1990 by filing
an application for a rent increase based on major capital im-
provements, to wit - a new roof, intercom, entrance and vestibule
doors, pointing, and waterproofing, and a heat timer at a total
cost of $16,123.75.
On April 12, 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
The tenant did not file an objection to the owner's application
although afforded the opportunity to do so.
On April 3, 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-
No rent increases were authorized based on the installation of a
In her petition for administrative review, the tenant requests
modification of the Rent Administrator's order and alleges that
the roof leaks into her apartment.
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 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 the tenant did not raise any
objection to the owner's application while this proceeding was
pending before the Rent Administrator when her complaints could
have been investigated, inspections carried out, and problems
resolved prior to the granting of any increases. Accordingly,
the objections raised now for the first time on administrative
appeal, pursuant to Section 2529.6 of the Code, may not be
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
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