FK 210150-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.:
FK 210150-RT; FK 210151-RT;
FK 210160-RT; FK 230149-RT;
FK 210152-RT; FK 210161-RT;
FK 210142-RT; FK 210153-RT;
VARIOUS TENANTS OF FK 210162-RT; FK 210143-RT;
266 WASHINGTON AVENUE FK 210154-RT; FK 210144-RT;
FK 210155-RT; FK 210156-RT;
FK 210146-RT; FK 210157-RT;
FK 210147-RT; FK 210158-RT;
FK 210148-RT; FK 210159-RT;
FK 210113-RT; FK 210133-RT;
FK 210114-RT; FK 210134-RT;
FK 210119-RT; FK 210135-RT;
FK 210124-RT; FK 210137-RT;
FK 210125-RT; FK 210138-RT;
FK 210126-RT; FK 210138-RT;
FK 210129-RT; FK 210139-RT;
FK 210130-RT; FK 210140-RT;
FK 210131-RT; FK 210141-RT;
FK 210145-RT; FK 210238-RT;
FK 210127-RT; FK 210128-RT
RENT ADMINISTRATOR'S
DOCKET NO.:
PETITIONERSCG 230088-OM
----------------------------------x
ORDER AND OPINION REMANDING THE PROCEEDING TO THE
RENT ADMINISTRATOR
The Commissioner has consolidated these petitions as they involve
common questions of law and fact.
Various tenants filed timely petitions for administrative review
of an order issued on October 18, 1991, by a Rent Administrator
concerning various housing accommodations in the premises known
266 Washington Avenue, 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.
FK 210150-RT, et al.
The owner commenced this proceeding on July 19, 1988 by filing an
application for a rent increase based on major capital improve-
ments, to wit - repiping, mailboxes, windows, boiler/burner,
water main, pointing and waterproofing, new roof, doors, intercom
and a waste compactor at a total cost of $527,683.38.
FK 210150-RT, et al.
FK 210150-RT, et al.
On January 5, 1989, the Division of Housing and Community Renewal
FK 210150-RT, et al.
(DHCR) served each tenant with a copy of the application and
FK 210150-RT, et al.
afforded the tenants the opportunity to review it and comment
FK 210150-RT, et al.
thereupon.
FK 210150-RT, et al.
FK 210150-RT, et al.
Various tenants responded, complaining of leaks, defective
FK 210150-RT, et al.
windows, elevator, intercom, compactors, mailboxes, roof and roof
FK 210150-RT, et al.
doors. Tenants' answers were served on the owner. An inspection
FK 210150-RT, et al.
conducted on September 26, 1991 and September 27, 1991 found no
FK 210150-RT, et al.
defective installations except for sink pipe leaks in Apt. B-2
FK 210150-RT, et al.
and sink knob leak in Apt. 4-B.
FK 210150-RT, et al.
FK 210150-RT, et al.
On October 18, 1991, the Rent Administrator issued the order here
FK 210150-RT, et al.
under review finding that the installations qualified as major
FK 210150-RT, et al.
capital improvements, determining that the application complied
FK 210150-RT, et al.
with the relevant laws and regulations based upon the supporting
FK 210150-RT, et al.
documentation submitted by the owner, and allowing appropriate
FK 210150-RT, et al.
rent increases for rent controlled and rent stabilized apart-
FK 210150-RT, et al.
ments.
FK 210150-RT, et al.
FK 210150-RT, et al.
Of the $527,683.38 total cost claimed by the owner, only
FK 210150-RT, et al.
$498,828.32 was approved. The work on the water main and new
FK 210150-RT, et al.
mailboxes was ruled not to be major capital improvements; the
FK 210150-RT, et al.
new doors and waste compactor installations were barred by the
FK 210150-RT, et al.
two year limitation rule, and $3,127 was disallowed on the cost
FK 210150-RT, et al.
of elevator upgrading due to lack of substantiation. The owner
FK 210150-RT, et al.
was directed to correct the conditions found in apartments B-2
FK 210150-RT, et al.
and 4-B.
FK 210150-RT, et al.
FK 210150-RT, et al.
In their petitions for administrative review the tenants request
FK 210150-RT, et al.
reversal or modification of the Rent Administrator's order
FK 210150-RT, et al.
alleging inter alia that the new windows do not work properly,
FK 210150-RT, et al.
that the roof leaks, that mailboxes are not secure, that the
FK 210150-RT, et al.
intercom is defective, that the elevators regularly breakdown,
FK 210150-RT, et al.
that permanent increases are a violation of the Rent Stabiliza-
FK 210150-RT, et al.
tion laws, that the "improvements" constitute only repairs, that
FK 210150-RT, et al.
no tenants saw or spoke to the inspector on September 26 and 27,
FK 210150-RT, et al.
FK 210150-RT, et al.
FK 210150-RT, et al.
FK 210150-RT, et al.
1991, that certain services, including heat and hot water, are
FK 210150-RT, et al.
deficient in the building. The tenant of apartment B-2 alleges
FK 210150-RT, et al.
that no repairs have been effectuated in that apartment. The
FK 210150-RT, et al.
tenant of apartment B-14 alleges he signed the rider to his first
FK 210150-RT, et al.
lease under protest. The tenants further allege that the last
FK 210150-RT, et al.
line of page one of the Rent Administrator's order is missing and
FK 210150-RT, et al.
that they object to paying more than a 6% rent increase.
FK 210150-RT, et al.
FK 210150-RT, et al.
After careful consideration the Commissioner is of the opinion
FK 210150-RT, et al.
that this proceeding should be remanded to the Rent Administrator
FK 210150-RT, et al.
for further processing.
FK 210150-RT, et al.
FK 210150-RT, et al.
The Commissioner notes that the last line on page one of the Rent
FK 210150-RT, et al.
Administrator's order is incomplete due to a typographical omis-
FK 210150-RT, et al.
sion. The last sentence on page one should read as follows:
FK 210150-RT, et al.
FK 210150-RT, et al.
The tenant may pay this amount in equal
FK 210150-RT, et al.
monthly payments not to exceed 6% of the rent
FK 210150-RT, et al.
as of July 12, 1988, any balance to be paid
FK 210150-RT, et al.
in the following months.
FK 210150-RT, et al.
FK 210150-RT, et al.
The Commissioner notes that the mailboxes installation did not
FK 210150-RT, et al.
qualify for rent increases based on a major capital improvement.
FK 210150-RT, et al.
Accordingly, no increases were granted therefor in the Rent Ad-
FK 210150-RT, et al.
ministrator's order.
FK 210150-RT, et al.
FK 210150-RT, et al.
In regard to the various objections raised by the tenants during
FK 210150-RT, et al.
the course of the Rent Administrator's proceeding the Commis-
FK 210150-RT, et al.
sioner notes that no less than thirty tenants complained about
FK 210150-RT, et al.
defective or poorly operating windows prior to the issuance of
FK 210150-RT, et al.
the order under review. Also, twenty tenants complained about
FK 210150-RT, et al.
defective intercoms after the new installations and nineteen
FK 210150-RT, et al.
tenants complained about various problems with the plumbing.
FK 210150-RT, et al.
FK 210150-RT, et al.
In response to these complaints the Rent Administrator served
FK 210150-RT, et al.
notice on the owner of the alleged problems raised in the tenant
FK 210150-RT, et al.
objections. In reply, the owner submitted forms signed by each
FK 210150-RT, et al.
of the tenants who had complained about the intercoms stating
FK 210150-RT, et al.
that there were no problems with the intercom. Accordingly, the
FK 210150-RT, et al.
Commissioner finds that the intercom was functioning properly at
FK 210150-RT, et al.
the time of issuance of the administrator's order and qualified
FK 210150-RT, et al.
for an MCI increase.
FK 210150-RT, et al.
FK 210150-RT, et al.
It is noted that a number of tenants complained about the ade-
FK 210150-RT, et al.
quacy of the work done on the elevators. The record indicates
FK 210150-RT, et al.
that the Rent Administrator investigated these complaints and the
FK 210150-RT, et al.
FK 210150-RT, et al.
FK 210150-RT, et al.
FK 210150-RT, et al.
inspections carried out on September 26, 27, 1991 revealed that
FK 210150-RT, et al.
the elevators were functioning properly at the time of issuance
FK 210150-RT, et al.
of the order under review. Accordingly, the Commissioner finds
FK 210150-RT, et al.
that the elevator upgrading qualified for an MCI rent increase.
FK 210150-RT, et al.
FK 210150-RT, et al.
The Commissioner notes that in regard to the windows complaints
FK 210150-RT, et al.
and plumbing complaints the inspector only visited two and five
FK 210150-RT, et al.
apartments respectively and that this was an inadequate number
FK 210150-RT, et al.
of apartments upon which to base the Rent Administrator's
FK 210150-RT, et al.
determination that the problems had been resolved or that the
FK 210150-RT, et al.
objections were groundless.
FK 210150-RT, et al.
FK 210150-RT, et al.
In regard to the windows, the Commissioner notes that thirty
FK 210150-RT, et al.
tenants raised objections to the quality of the installations
FK 210150-RT, et al.
and that the owner submitted the tenants' sign-offs for certain
FK 210150-RT, et al.
of these tenants stating that problems didn't exist. The ten-
FK 210150-RT, et al.
ants of the apartments who complained about windows but for whom
FK 210150-RT, et al.
no sign-offs were submitted and whose apartments were not
FK 210150-RT, et al.
inspected include: A12, A14, B4, B6, B17, B20, C20, D4, D19, E1,
FK 210150-RT, et al.
E19, E4, E6, E10, E12, E18, F1, and B15. Accordingly the Commis-
FK 210150-RT, et al.
sioner finds that this proceeding should be remanded to the Rent
FK 210150-RT, et al.
Administrator for further processing, including an inspection if
FK 210150-RT, et al.
deemed necessary, in order to ascertain whether all window prob-
FK 210150-RT, et al.
lems and defects have been corrected.
FK 210150-RT, et al.
FK 210150-RT, et al.
In regard to plumbing, the Commissioner notes that the tenants of
FK 210150-RT, et al.
nineteen apartments raised objections alleging problems. The
FK 210150-RT, et al.
owner submitted sign-offs by certain of these tenants and the
FK 210150-RT, et al.
inspector found no problems existed in certain other apartments.
FK 210150-RT, et al.
The tenants of the apartments who alleged plumbing defects but
FK 210150-RT, et al.
for whom the owner did not submit sign-offs and whose apartments
FK 210150-RT, et al.
were not inspected include the following: Apartments. B17, B20,
FK 210150-RT, et al.
C12, D4, E1, E4, E6, E18, F17, B2, and B4. Accordingly the Com-
FK 210150-RT, et al.
missioner finds that this proceeding should be remanded to the
FK 210150-RT, et al.
Rent Administrator for further processing, including an inspec-
FK 210150-RT, et al.
tion, if deemed necessary, in order to ascertain whether all
FK 210150-RT, et al.
plumbing problems and defects have been corrected.
FK 210150-RT, et al.
FK 210150-RT, et al.
In regard to the remaining items for which the Rent Administrator
FK 210150-RT, et al.
granted rent increases based upon major capital improvements the
FK 210150-RT, et al.
Commissioner finds, based upon a close review of the record, that
FK 210150-RT, et al.
the increases were warranted and should be sustained.
FK 210150-RT, et al.
FK 210150-RT, et al.
In conclusion the Commissioner finds that the order under review
FK 210150-RT, et al.
should be affirmed as to all claimed items except the windows and
FK 210150-RT, et al.
repiping in the apartments hereinabove-cited. For these apart-
FK 210150-RT, et al.
ments the Commissioner determines that the proceeding should be
FK 210150-RT, et al.
remanded for further processing.
FK 210150-RT, et al.
FK 210150-RT, et al.
FK 210150-RT, et al.
FK 210150-RT, et al.
This order and opinion is issued without prejudice to the
FK 210150-RT, et al.
tenants' rights to file complaints based on a diminution of
FK 210150-RT, et al.
services, inadequate heat and hot water, or overcharge, should
FK 210150-RT, et al.
the facts so warrant.
FK 210150-RT, et al.
FK 210150-RT, et al.
FK 210150-RT, et al.
THEREFORE, in accordance with the Rent Stabilization Law and
FK 210150-RT, et al.
Code, and the Rent and Eviction Regulations, it is
FK 210150-RT, et al.
FK 210150-RT, et al.
ORDERED, that this proceeding be, and the same hereby is, re-
FK 210150-RT, et al.
manded to the Rent Administrator for further processing in
FK 210150-RT, et al.
accordance with this order and opinion. In all other respects
FK 210150-RT, et al.
the Rent Administrator's order is affirmed. The previously
FK 210150-RT, et al.
issued Rent Administrator's order remains in full force and
FK 210150-RT, et al.
effect until a new order is issued on remand.
FK 210150-RT, et al.
FK 210150-RT, et al.
FK 210150-RT, et al.
ISSUED:
FK 210150-RT, et al.
FK 210150-RT, et al.
FK 210150-RT, et al.
FK 210150-RT, et al.
JOSEPH A. D'AGOSTA
FK 210150-RT, et al.
Deputy Commissioner
FK 210150-RT, et al.
FK 210150-RT, et al.
FK 210150-RT, et al.
|
