OFFICE OF RENT ADMINISTRATION 
                                     GERTZ PLAZA
                               92-31 UNION HALL STREET
                              JAMAICA, NEW YORK  11433


          APPEAL OF                               ADMINISTRATIVE REVIEW
                                                  DOCKET NOS:FH510082RT,
          Various Tenants of                      FH510083RT, FH510121RT,
          11 Wadsworth Avenue                     FH510123RT, FH520124RT,
          New York, New York                      FH510125RT, FH510126RT,
                                                  D.R.O. DOCKET NO:


          On July 31, 1991 and August 1, 1991 t e  above-named  petitioner-
          tenants filed Administrative Appeals against an order  issued  on
          July 9, 1991 by the District Rent Administrator, 92-31 Union Hall 
          Street, Jamaica New York, concerning the  housing  accommodations
          known as  11  Wadsworth  Avenue,  New  York,  New  York,  Various

          The various tenants' appeals against  the  Administrator's  order
          are consolidated in  this proceeding for a uniform  determination

          The issue herein  is  whether  the  District  Rent  Administrator
          properly granted the owner's  application  for  a  Major  Capital
          Improvement  (MCI) increase in rent.

          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 administrative appeals.

          The District Rent Administrator's order, appealed herein, granted 
          the owner's MCI application based upon the  owner's  installation
          of a roof and replacement windows for the subject  building  with
          approved net costs for MCI's totalling $29,765.00.

          However,  because  an  inspection  revealed  that   the   windows
          installed in apartments 2-D, 3-A  and  4-B  were  defective,  the
          owner was barred form collecting  the  window  part  of  the  MCI
          increase from these three (3) tenants  until  such  time  as  the
          Docket No. FH510082RT         - 2 -

          replacement windows were repaired.  The three  tenants,  however,
          were required to pay the roof part of the MCI increase.

          The  maximum/legal  regulated  rents  of  all   apartments   were

          increased by the District Rent Administrator as follows:

               (A)  Rent-controlled housing units by $3.35  per  room,  per

               (B)  Rent-Stabilized housing units by $4.55  per  room,  per

          The above rental increases were subject to the modifications  for
          apartments 2-D, 3-A and 4-B noted above  and  further  to  a  tax
          abatement  offset  computation  based  upon  a  J-51  yearly  tax
          benefit, affecting rent-stabilized tenants.

          On appeal, the petitioner-tenants assert that the quality of  the
          replacement windows is poor; that some were broken; that some  do
          not properly go up or lock;  and  that,  in  general,  there  are
          remaining window problems.  None of the petitioner-tenants raised 
          any issue on appeal about the roof repair.

          After a careful consideration of the entire  evidence  of  record
          the Commissioner  is  of  the  opinion  that  the  administrative
          appeals should be denied.

          Rent increases for major capital improvements are  authorized  by
          Section 2202.4 of the Rent and  Eviction  Regulations  for  rent-
          controlled  apartments   and   Section   2522.4   of   the   Rent
          Stabilization Law for  rent-stabilized  apartments.   Under  rent
          control, an increase is warranted where there has been since July 
          1, 1970 a major capital improvement required for  the  operation,
          preservation,  or  maintenance  of  the  structure.   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 record in the instant case indicates that the owner  properly
          complied with the application  procedures  for  a  major  capital
          improvement and the District Rent Administrator properly computed 
          the appropriate rent increases. 

          The owner commenced  the  proceeding  below  by  filing  his  MCI
          application in 1989.  In response  to  the  application,  various
          tenants  objected  to  the  increase.   The  objections  included
          problems with the windows.  However, the tenants of apartments 2 
          C, 3-B and 3-D did not file answers to the owner's application.

          Docket No. FH510082RT         - 3 -

          On January 29, 1991 copies of the tenants' complaints  were  sent
          to the owner, who in turn, replied on February 14, 1991, that all 
          problems with the windows had been corrected.

          On March 27, 1991, a copy of the owner's response was sent to the 
          various tenants for confirmation.

          The Commissioner  notes  that  the  District  Rent  Administrator

          stated that only three (3) tenants (apartments 2D,  3A,  and  4B)
          responded  and  all  three  stated  that  the  windows  in  their
          apartments were still defective.  Consequently, an inspection was 
          held on May 21, 1991, which supported these three tenants' claims 
          and the District Rent  Administrator's  order  of  July  9,  1991
          eliminated the owner's collection of a window rent increase until 
          such time as these windows were repaired.

          The  Commissioner  also  notes  that  three  of  the  petitioners
          (apartments 2-C, 3-B and 3-D) raised no objections to the quality 
          or adequacy of the installations while this proceeding was before 
          the  Rent  Administrator  although   they   were   afforded   the
          opportunity to do so.

          Accordingly, pursuant to  prior  administrative  decisions  under
          the Rent and Eviction Regulations and pursuant to Section  2529.6
          of the Rent Stabilization Code, these  tenants'  allegations  may
          not be  considered  now  when  offered  for  the  first  time  on
          administrative appeal.

          Upon the evidence in the file, the Commissioner  finds  that  the
          MCI rental increases ordered below should not be revoked.

          This order and opinion, however, is issued without  prejudice  to
          the right of the tenants to file complaints of service  decrease,
          seeking rent reductions, in which they may claim that the windows 
          installed in their individual apartments are  defective  and  not
          operating properly.  

          THEREFORE, in accordance with the  provisions  of  the  Rent  and
          Eviction Regulations for New York City and the Rent Stabilization 
          Law and Code, it is 

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


                                             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