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 NOS.:
: GF 210408-RT; GF 210491-RT;
GF 210489-RT; GF 210488-RT;
VARIOUS TENANTS GF 210486-RT; GF 210483-RT;
PETITIONER : GF 210485-RT; GF 210393-RT;
------------------------------------X GF 210422-RT; GF 210430-RT;
GF 210447-RT; GF 210448-RT;
GF 210452-RT; GF 210453-RT;
GF 210455-RT; GF 210392-RT;
GF 210476-RT; GF 210473-RT;
GF 210472-RT; GF 210471-RT;
GF 210470-RT; GF 210469-RT;
GF 210467-RT; GF 210466-RT;
GF 210465-RT; GF 210464-RT;
GF 210468-RT; GF 210444-RT;
GF 210441-RT; GF 210440-RT;
GF 210438-RT; GF 210435-RT;
GF 210423-RT; GF 210402-RT;
GF 210401-RT; GF 210480-RT;
GF 210482-RT; GF 210479-RT;
GF 210478-RT; GF 210477-RT;
GF 210457-RT; GF 210456-RT;
GF 210391-RT; GF 210451-RT;
GF 210442-RT; GF 210439-RT;
GF 210437-RT; GF 210436-RT;
GF 210434-RT; GF 210433-RT;
GF 210432-RT; GF 210431-RT;
GF 210429-RT; GF 210427-RT;
GF 210407-RT; GF 210406-RT;
GF 210405-RT; GF 210404-RT;
GF 210403-RT; GF 210475-RT;
GF 210454-RT; GF 210481-RT;
GF 210487-RT; GF 210484-RT;
GF 210450-RT
RENT ADMINISTRATOR'S
DOCKET NO.: CJ 230116-OM
ORDER AND OPINION REMANDING PETITIONS FOR ADMINISTRATIVE REVIEW
The above-named petitioners-tenants timely filed petitions for
Administrative Review against an order issued on May 26, 1991 by the Rent
Administrator (Gertz Plaza) concerning the housing accommodations known as
95 Linden Blvd, Brooklyn, New York, Various Apartments, wherein the
Administrator granted major capital improvement (MCI) rent increases for the
stabilized apartments in the subject premises based on the rewiring of the
premises, including the installation of air conditioner outlets in each
apartment.
DOCKET NUMBER: GF 210408-RT et.al
The Commissioner has reviewed all of the evidence in the record and has
carefully considered that portion of the record relevant to the issue raised
by the administrative appeals.
Sixty-six tenants filed the within administrative appeals against the
Administrator's order. These appeals are consolidated herein for a uniform
determination in this proceeding as all contains common issues of law and
fact.
The owner commenced the proceeding below on October 1, 1988, by filing an
application to increase the rentals for stabilized apartments based on the
rewiring of the subject premises at a total claimed cost of $113,800.00. In
the application the owner indicated that the building contains 119
apartments and the superintendent's apartment.
In response to the owner's application, twenty-four tenants contended, in
substance, that the work performed was inadequate since heavy duty outlet
was not installed in their apartments; that the lights went off when they
used certain electrical equipment; that the double duplex outlet is not
accessible and as a result they have to use extension cords in order to plug
in electrical equipment ;that the circuit breaker boxes protrude from the
wall; that many apartments and public areas have water leaks; that the
apartments and the building's public areas are not kept clean; that elevator
service is often disrupted due to poor maintenance; that the mailboxes are
broken; that the public walls are defaced with graffiti; and that the
intercom system does not work.
The owner responded by submitting a letter stating, in substance, that it
will install "wood" moldings in all apartments where the circuit breaker is
not "flush" with the wall.
The Rent Administrator's order appealed herein, stated that the tenants had
complained about faulty rewiring; that the owner was notified to make the
necessary repairs and that the tenants failed to respond to a subsequent
inquiry from this Division requesting them to notify the agency if the
repairs were made.
The Administrator's order granted the requested rent increase based on the
full, stated cost of the rewiring.
On appeal, the petitioner-tenants (66) contend, in substance, that: 1) the
work herein involved only the installation of circuit breaker boxes in the
apartments; 2) the wall plugs, light receptacles and wiring were never
installed; 3) some of the outlets in the apartment do not work; 4) the owner
did not make the necessary repairs it promised during the proceeding below;
5) the Division should have conducted an inspection of the premises to
verify same; also, the tenant of apartment #47-B states, in substance, that
she took occupancy after the rewiring work; and that she should not be
charged any retroactive increase.
The Commissioner is of the opinion that this matter should be remanded to
the Administrator for further appropriate processing.
DOCKET NUMBER: GF 210408-RT et.al
At the outset, the Commissioner notes that for an electrical upgrading to
qualify as an MCI under current procedures, the job requires the
installation of new risers and feeders extending from the property box in
the basement to every housing accommodations of sufficient capacity to
accommodate the installation of air conditioner circuits as well as the
installation of a double duplex outlet in the kitchen to accommodate heavy
duty appliances. The record herein discloses that the owner submitted to
the Administrator in support of its application copies of the contract,
cancelled checks, contractor's certification, and the Certificate of
Electrical Inspection from the Bureau of Electrical Control for the work in
question.
The Commissioner notes, however, that the numerous allegations of the
tenants concerning the protrusion of the circuit breaker boxes from the wall
and faulty receptacles were not properly addressed by the Administrator.
Accordingly, the Commissioner deems it appropriate to remand this proceeding
to the Administrator for further processing. The Administrator, on notice
to all parties, should reexamine the owner's application and take such
action as may be deemed necessary, including a physical inspection of the
premises, to resolve the tenants' allegations regarding the quality of the
work performed.
Regarding the tenant of apartment 47-B who claimed to have taken occupancy
of the subject apartment after the rewiring work, the Commissioner notes
that this tenant is not liable for any retroactive increase authorized by
the herein order.
THEREFORE, pursuant to the Rent Stabilization Law and Code, it is
ORDERED, that these petitions be and the same hereby are granted to the
extent of remanding these proceedings to the Rent Administrator for further
processing in accordance with this order and opinion. The automatic stay of
so much of the Rent Administrator's order as directed a retroactive rent
increase is hereby continued until a new order is issued upon remand.
However, the Administrator's determination as to a prospective rent increase
is not stayed and shall remain in effect until the Administrator issues a
new order upon remand.
ISSUED:
JOSEPH A. D'AGOSTA
Acting Deputy Commissioner
|