FG 110365-RT, et al.
                                  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
          APPEALS OF                              DOCKET NOS.:   
                                                  FG 110365-RT;  FG 110512-RT 
             JOHN and YVONNE MOORE,     FG 110364-RT;  FG 110393-RT
             ELAINE JOHN, SANDRA FORD,            FG 110505-RT;  FG 110177-RT 
             ELMARIE HOLMES, ETHEL REMBERT,
             and HARRY HARRIS                     RENT ADMINISTRATOR'S
                                                  DOCKET NO.:
                                  PETITIONERS     DK 110209-OM
          ----------------------------------x



            ORDER AND OPINION DENYING PETITIONS FOR ADMINISTRATIVE REVIEW  


          The Commissioner has consolidated these petitions as they involve 
          common questions of law and fact.

          The above-named tenants, filed timely petitions  for  administra-
          tive review of an order  issued  on  June  28,  1991  by  a  Rent
          Administrator concerning the buildings known  as  158-06/50  76th
          Avenue, 158-05/49 76th Road, Flushing, 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  November  6,  1989  by
          filing an application for a rent increase based on major  capital
          improvements, to wit - roof, new boiler and  hot  water  heaters,
          windows, breeching for new boilers, heat timers, and mailboxes at 
          a total cost of $345,419.18.

          On March 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
          thereupon.


          The petitioning tenants  did  not  file  any  objections  to  the
          owner's application although afforded the opportunity to do so.

          On June 28, 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 stabilized apartments.  







          FG 110365-RT, et al.

          No rent increases were  allowed  for  the  installation  of  heat
          timers or mailboxes.
                         
          In their petitions for administrative review, the tenants request 
          reversal of the Rent Administrator's order  alleging  defects  in
          the windows and roof and inadequate heat.

          After careful consideration the Commissioner is  of  the  opinion
          that these petitions should be denied.

          The Commissioner notes that none of the  petitioners  raised  any
          objections to the owner's application while this  proceeding  was
          pending before the  Rent  Administrator  even  though  they  were
          afforded the opportunity to  do  so.   Accordingly,  pursuant  to
          Section 2529.6 of the Rent Stabilization Code the objections they 
          raise now, for the first time on administrative appeal,  may  not
          be considered herein.

          This order and opinion is issued without prejudi e  to  the  ten-
          ants' rights to  file  complaints  based  upon  a  diminution  of
          services or inadequate heat if the facts so warrant.


          THEREFORE, in accordance with  the  Rent  Stabilization  Law  and
          Code, it is         

          ORDERED, that these petitions be, and the same hereby are, denied 
          and that the Rent Administrator's order be, and the  same  hereby
          is, affirmed.


          ISSUED:


                                                                           
                                                JOSEPH A. D'AGOSTA
                                                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