FG 110484-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.:   
                                                  FG              110484-RT
                     ALVARO CASAS,      
                                                  RENT ADMINISTRATOR'S
                                                  DOCKET NO.:
                                  PETITIONER      CJ 130047-OM        
          ----------------------------------x


            ORDER AND OPINION DENYING PETITION FOR ADMINISTRATIVE REVIEW   



          On July 30, 1991, the above-named tenant, refiled a petition  for
          administrative review of an order issued on May 16,  1991,  by  a
          Rent Administrator concerning the housing accommodation, known 
          as Apartment 2-K, 34-34 77th Street, Jackson Heights, New York, 
          wherein the Rent Administrator  determined  that  the  owner  was
          entitled to a rent increase based on a major capital  improvement
          (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  October  17,  1988  by
          filing an application for  a  rent  increase  based  on  a  major
          capital improvement,  to  wit  -  windows  at  a  total  cost  of
          $114,660.00.

          On January 31,  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 May 16, 1991, the Rent Administrator  issued  the  order  here
          under review finding that the installation qualified as  a  major
          capital improvement, 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.  
                         
          In his petition for administrative review,  the  tenant  requests







          FG 110484-RT
          reversal of the Rent Administrator's order and alleges  that  the
          window cost was excessive and that the rent increase  should  not
          be permanent.               

          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  any
          objections to the owner's application when  this  proceeding  was
          pending before the Rent Administrator although  he  was  afforded
          the opportunity to do so.   Accordingly,  the  objections  raised
          now for the first time on administrative appeal may not, pursuant 
          to Section 2529.6 of the Rent Stabilization Code,  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, and the Rent and Eviction Regulations, 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