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.:GH110136RT/GH110092RT
                                          :              GH110091RT/GH110145RT
      VARIOUS TENANTS OF 41-40 PARSONS      
      BOULEVARD, QUEENS, NY                  RENT ADMINISTRATOR'S
                            PETITIONERS   :  DOCKET NO.: ED1101530M
      ------------------------------------X                             

            ORDER AND OPINION DENYING PETITIONS FOR ADMINISTRATIVE REVIEW

      The above-named petitioners timely filed Petitions for Administrative 
      Review against an order issued on July 24, 1992 by the Rent Administrator 
      (Gertz Plaza), concerning housing accommodations known as 41-40 Parsons 
      Blvd., Queens, New York, various apartments, wherein the Administrator 
      partially granted the owner's major capital improvements (MCI) application.

      The Commissioner deems it appropriate to consolidate the Administrative 
      appeals for determination under this order and opinion as they involve 
      common issues of law and fact.

      The Administrator authorized rent increase adjustments for replacement 
      windows, a new boiler/burner, a new intercom system, and elevator 
      upgrading.  The Administrator disallowed $4000.00 from the claimed cost 
      ($20,000.00) of the elevator on the grounds that this amount represents 
      expenses incurred for additional repairs.  The Administrator denied MCI 
      rent increases for pointing/waterproofing, and a new roof as these items 
      did not fully meet the requirements for same.

      The Commissioner has reviewed all of the evidence of record and has 
      carefully considered that portion of the record relevant to the issues 
      raised by the administrative appeals.                         

      In their petitions the tenants do not question the propriety of the 
      Administrator's finding with respect to the quality of the work performed 
      but rather contend, in substance, that essential services were not being 
      maintained; and that the items, for which the rent increases were granted, 
      were in disrepair prior to the improvements.

      Rent increases for major capital improvements are authorized by Section 
      2522.4 of the Rent Stabilization Code and are warranted where the 
      improvements are 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 correctly complied 
      with the application procedures for major capital improvement and the 









          ADMIN. REVIEW DOCKET NO.: GH110136RT, et. al.



      Rent Administrator properly computed the appropriate rent increase for 
      those installations found to qualify.  The tenants have not established 
      that the increase should be revoked.

      The record discloses that the owner substantiated its application in the 
      proceeding below by submitting to the Administrator documentation in 
      support thereof, including copies of contracts, contractor's certification 
      and cancelled checks for the work herein.

      The tenants's argument that the items, prior to the work herein, were in 
      disrepair does not constitute a basis for barring the owner's entitlement 
      to a major capital improvement rent increase to which it is otherwise 
      entitled.  In fact, it confirms that the improvements were much needed for 
      the continued operation and preservation of the structure.

      Based on the entire evidence of record the Commissioner finds that the 
      Administrator's order is correct and should be affirmed.

      THEREFORE, in accordance with the applicable provisions of the Rent 
      Stabilization Law and Code, it is

      ORDERED, that these petitions, and the same hereby are, denied; and that 
      the 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