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

          -------------------------------------X   ADMINISTRATIVE REVIEW
          APPEALS OF                               GD210040RT,   GD210063RT,
                    VARIOUS TENANTS OF             GD210064RT
                    532 LEFFERTS AVENUE
                    BROOKLYN, NY                   RENT ADMINISTRATOR'S
                                                   DOCKET NO.:  DK210153OM



          The above named petitioner-tenants timely filed petitions for 
          administrative review (PARs) against an order issued on March 2, 
          1992, by a Rent Administrator (Gertz Plaza) concerning the housing 
          accommodations known as 532 Lefferts Avenue, Brooklyn, New York, 
          various apartments, wherein the Rent Administrator determined that 
          the owner was entitled to a rent increase based on the installation 
          of major capital improvements (MCIs).

          The Commissioner deems it appropriate to consolidate these 
          petitions for disposition since they pertain to the same order and 
          involve common issues of law and fact.

          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 these administrative appeals.

          The owner commenced this proceeding on November 21, 1989, by 
          initially filing an application for a rent increase based on the 
          installation of the following items at a total cost of $105,495.60:  
               a) new prime windows;
               b) building entrance doors; and 
               c) boiler/burner

          The tenants objected to the owner's MCI application, alleging, in 
          substance, that the heat and hot water supplied to the building are 
          inadequate; that new apartment doors are needed; that the windows 
          are drafty; and that the building services and maintenance are 

          The owner responded to the tenants' objections by contending, in 
          substance, that as of December 23, 1991, all the necessary repairs 
          had been effectuated in all apartments; that adequate heat and hot 
          water was being supplied to the tenants; and that the windows are 
          in good working order.

          ADMIN. REVIEW DOCKET NO. GD-210039-RT ET. AL.

          Subsequently on December 30, 1991, DHCR sent the owner's response 
          to all tenants who responded to the application with complaints 
          relevant to the MCIs eliciting three (3) responses which did not 
          pertain to the MCIs herein.

          On March 2, 1992, the DHCR issued the order here under review 
          finding that the installations qualified as MCIs, determining that 
          the application complied with the relevant laws and regulations 
          based upon the supporting documentation submitted by the owner, and 
          allowing appropriate rent increases for rent stabilized tenants.

          In these petitions, the tenants contend, in substance, that the 
          heat and hot water supply is inadequate; that the windows are 
          drafty; and that various apartment services are not being 

          In reply to the tenants' petitions, the owner asserts that the 
          tenants have not raised any issues which would merit modification 
          or reversal of the Administrator's order.

          After a careful consideration of the entire evidence of record, the 
          Commissioner is of the opinion that these petitions should be 

          Rent increases for major capital improvements are authorized by 
          Section 2522.4 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.

          The evidence of record in the instant case indicates that the 
          tenants were given the opportunity to respond to the owner's 
          assertion that all the complaints submitted in the proceeding below 
          had been satisfied yet only one (1) of the petitioners responded 
          thereto, and said response raised issues wholely irrelevant to this 
          proceeding.  Hence, the issues raised on appeal are matters which 
          have been properly addressed by the Administrator in the proceeding 
          below based on the tenants' failure to rebut the owner's claims. 


          ADMIN. REVIEW DOCKET NO. GD-210039-RT ET. AL.

          However, the Commissioner notes that this order and opinion is 
          issued without prejudice to the right of the tenants to file 
          building-wide and/or individual apartment services complaints with 
          the DHCR which may result in reductions from the current rents, if 
          the facts so warrant.

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

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


                                                         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