FH 410305-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.:   
                                                  FH 410305-RT             
                 LYDIA MARRERO,
                                                  RENT ADMINISTRATOR'S
                                                  DOCKET NO.:
                                  PETITIONER     CE 430059-OM        
          ----------------------------------x


            ORDER AND OPINION DENYING PETITION FOR ADMINISTRATIVE REVIEW   


          On August 21, 1991, the above-named tenant,  refiled  a  petition
          for administrative review of an order issued on  June  14,  1991,
          by a Rent Administrator  concerning  the  housing  accommodation,
          known as Apartment 11, 40 Wyckoff  Street,  Brooklyn,  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 May 10, 1988, by filing an 
          application for a rent increase based on major  capital  improve-
          ments, to wit - an intercom, burner, and apartment windows  at  a
          total cost of $40,673.83.

          On November 28, 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 interposed an objection  to  the  owner's  application
          alleging inadequate heat and a defective intercom.  The owner was 
          notified and, on April 17, 1991, advised that the tenant's 


          intercom had been corrected and that adequate heat and hot  water
          was being provided as prescribed by law.  The owner's  reply  was
          served upon the tenant on April 26, 1991.   The  tenant  did  not
          respond to the owner's reply although she was afforded the oppor 
          tunity to do so and although she was advised that failure  to  do
          so would result in a determination based solely on  the  informa-
          tion in the record.

          On June 14, 1991, the Rent Administrator issued  the  order  here







          FH 410305-RT
          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 controlled  and  rent  stabilized  apart-
          ments.  
                         
          In her petition for administrative review,  the  tenant  requests
          reversal of the Rent Administrator's order and alleges  that  the
          intercom is defective and that there were days during the  winter
          that she had no heat for one reason or another.        

          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 stabil-
          ized 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 during the  proceeding  under  review
          the tenant failed to respond to the  Rent  Administrator's  April
          26, 1991 inquiry and that her allegations contained in the  peti-
          tion are otherwise unsupported by any substantiating evidence.

          This order  and  opinion  is  issued  without  prejudice  to  the
          tenant's right to file a  complaint  based  on  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 this petition be, and the same  hereby  is,  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