STATE OF NEW YORK
DIVISION OF HOUSING AND COMMUNITY RENEWAL
OFFICE OF RENT ADMINISTRATION
92-31 UNION HALL STREET
JAMAICA, NEW YORK 11433
IN THE MATTER OF THE ADMINISTRATIVE : ADMINISTRATIVE REVIEW
APPEALS OF DOCKET NOS.:
CARL N. WATSON, PABLITA NICHOLSON, : FA210035RT
CYNTHIA STEWART, NORMA MYERS, FA210505RT
CLAUDETTE ROWE FA210506RT
PETITIONERS : FA210367RT
DOCKET NO.: CA210059OM
ORDER AND OPINION DENYING PETITIONS FOR ADMINISTRATIVE REVIEW
The above-named petitioner-tenants timely filed or refiled administrative
appeals against an order issued on December 7, 1990 by the Rent
Administrator (92-31 Union Hall Street, Jamaica, New York) concerning the
housing accommodations known as 328 Sterling Place, 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 installation of a new boiler/burner at the
In their petitions the tenants contend, in substance, that the old
boiler/burner was not properly maintained and had to be replaced and that
the cost of such replacement should not be "passed on" to the tenants.
Various tenants raise heat and/or hot water complaints as well as other
unrelated service complaints.
In response, the owner asserts that the costs of major capital improvements
can be "passed along" to tenants pursuant to the Rent Stabilization Code.
After a careful consideration of the entire record, the Commissioner is of
the opinion that these petitions should be denied.
Rent increases for major capital improvements are authorized by Section
25222.4 of the Rent Stabilization Code for rent stabilized apartments.
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.
It is the established position of the Division that the installation of a
new boiler/burner meets the definitional requirements of a major capital
improvement. In fact the tenants confirm that the condition of the old
heating system was such that its replacement was necessary for the
continued operation, preservation and maintenance of the structure.
DOCKET NUMBER: FA 210035-RT, et al.
The Commissioner notes that the petitioners herein 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 Section 2529.6 of the Rent Stabilization Code, the
tenants' allegations may not be considered now when offered for the first
time on administrative appeal.
The record in the instant case, which includes copies of proposals,
contractors' certifications, cancelled checks and governmental approvals
for the work performed, indicates that the owner correctly complied with
the applicable procedures for a major capital improvement; and that the
Rent Administrator correctly computed the appropriate rent increases based
on the proven cost of the various improvements. The tenants have not
established that the increase should be revoked.
This Order and Opinion is issued without prejudice to the tenants right to
file the appropriate application for a decrease in rent based on a decrease
in services, if the facts so warrant.
THEREFORE, in accordance with the provisions of the Rent Stabilization Law
and Code, it is
ORDERED, that these petitions be, and the same hereby are, denied, and that
the order of the Rent Administrator be, and the same hereby is, affirmed.
JOSEPH A. D'AGOSTA
Acting Deputy Commissioner