DHCR Decisions                              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.:FB 220098-RT                                          :              FB 210163-RT                                                         FB 210268-RT        VARIOUS TENANTS,                                 FB 210196-RT                            PETITIONER    :              FB 210321-RT      ------------------------------------X              FB 210427-RT                                             RENT ADMINISTRATOR'S                                             DOCKET NO.: ZBI 230247-OM            ORDER AND OPINION DENYING PETITION FOR ADMINISTRATIVE REVIEW      The petitioner-tenants timely filed administrative appeals against an order      issued on January 25, 1991 by the Rent Administrator (92-31 Union Hall      Street, Jamaica, New York) concerning the housing accommodations known as      940 Prospect Place, Brooklyn, New York, Various Apartments, wherein the      Administrator granted major capital improvement (MCI) rent increases for      the controlled and stabilized apartments in the subject premises based on      the installation of boiler and burner which services the subject premises      and an adjoining building.      The owner commenced the proceeding below by filing its MCI application in      September of 1987.  In support of its application, the owner submitted      copies of contracts, invoices, government approvals, contractor's statement      and cancelled checks.      The District Rent Administrator's order, appealed herein, contains the      notation that no response was received to the initial service of the      application and that subsequent inquiry mailed on August 7, 1990 to various      tenants also brought no response.      On appeal, the petitioner-tenants states, in substance, that: A) the boiler      breaks down regularly; B) there is a lack of heat and hot water; C) there      is only one boiler between the two buildings; and D) the owner is not      maintaining services and various defects exist throughtout the building.      After a careful consideration of the entire evidence of record, the      Commissioner is of the opinion that these administrative appeals should be      denied.      The Commissioner notes that the record of this proceeding reveals that the      petitioner-tenants failed to raise before the Rent Administrator the issues      which they seek to raise for the first time in the context of this      administrative appeal proceeding.           DOCKET NUMBER: FB 220098-RT; et al.      Fundamental principles of the administrative appeal process and Section      2529.6 of the Rent Stabilization Code prohibit a party from raising issues      on appeal which were not raise below as the petitioner-tenants could have      raised the very issues before the Rent Administrator which they seek to      raise for the first time on appeal.  Accordingly, the Commissioner is      constrained to foreclose consideration of these issues in this appeal      proceeding.      The Commissioner further notes that the boiler and burner serves 930 and      940 Prospect Place.  The entire cost of $32,000.00 was split between both      buildings, as per docket No. BI 230246-OM (930 Prospect Place) and docket      No. BI 230247-OM (940 Prospect Place).  Therefore the Rent Administrator      properly allocated the cost of $16,000.00 per building.      As to the tenants' contention with respect to the maintenance of services,      a review of Division records discloses that there were no orders      outstanding against the subject premises based on the owner's failure to      maintain services of a building-wide nature nor were there any heat and hot      water complaints failed with the Division at the time the order of the      Administrator was issued.  The determination herein is without prejudice to      the right of the tenants to file a service complaint with the Division of      Housing and Community Renewal, if the facts now so warrant.      On the basis of the entire evidence of record, it is found 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, the Rent and Eviction Regulations for the City      of New York, and Operational Bulletin 84-1, it is      ORDERED, that these administrative appeal be, and the same hereby is      denied; and that the Administrator's order be, and the same hereby is      affirmed.      ISSUED:                                                                                                               JOSEPH A. D'AGOSTA                                       Acting Deputy Commissioner