FJ 120545-RT; FG 110374-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
APPEALS OF DOCKET NOS.:
FJ 120545-RT
STANLEY PICHTEL and FG 110374-RT
MILAN BACIC,
RENT ADMINISTRATOR'S
DOCKET NO.:
PETITIONERS CD 130006-OM
----------------------------------x
ORDER AND OPINION DENYING PETITION FOR ADMINISTRATIVE REVIEW
The Commissioner has consolidated these petitions as they involve
common questions of law and fact.
The above-named tenants timely filed and refiled petitions for
administrative review of an order issued on July 5, 1991, by a
Rent Administrator concerning the housing accommodations known as
Apartments 14, and 12A, 31-12 42nd Street, Astoria, 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 April 1, 1988, by filing
an application for a rent increase based on a major capital
improvement, to wit - pointing and waterproofing at a total cost
of $11,300.00.
On November 11, 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 of Apartment 14 did not file an objection to the
owner's application although afforded the opportunity to do so.
The tenant of Apartment 12A alleged a leak due to inadequate
pointing and waterproofing. His apartment was inspected on May
FJ 120545-RT; FG 110374-RT
14, 1991. The DHCR inspector found conditions not to be as
alleged by the tenant.
On July 5, 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 controlled and rent stabilized apart-
ments.
In his petition for administrative review the tenant of Apartment
14 requests reversal of the Rent Administrator's order alleging
leaks in his apartment. The tenant of Apartment 12-A also re-
quests the order's reversal alleging various service deficiencies
in his apartment.
After careful consideration the Commissioner is of the opinion
that these petitions should be denied.
The Commissioner notes that these two tenants did not raise any
of the issues alleged in their petitions 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 and pursuant to
prior administrative decisions under the Rent and Eviction
Regulations, the allegations they make now, for the first time on
administrative appeal, may not be considered herein.
This Order and Opinion is issued without prejudice to the ten-
ants' rights to file complaints based on a diminution of services
if the facts so warrant.
THEREFORE, in accordance with the Rent Stabilization Law and
Code, and the Rent and Eviction Regulations for New York City,
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
FJ 120545-RT; FG 110374-RT
|
