P                         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   ADMINISTRATIVE REVIEW
          IN THE MATTER OF THE ADMINISTRATIVE     DOCKET NO.: GD510154RT
          APPEAL OF

                  Aurora Chelednik, 
                                                  RENT ADMINISTRATOR'S
                               PETITIONER         DOCKET NO: DK530049OM
          ------------------------------------X

            ORDER AND OPINION DENYING PETITION FOR ADMINISTRATIVE REVIEW

          On April 2, 1992 the above-named tenant filed a Petition for 
          Administrative Review of an order issued on March 20, 1992 by a 
          Rent Administrator, Gertz Plaza, 92-31 Union Hall Street, Jamaica, 
          NY, concerning the housing accommodations known as Apartment 1E, 
          510 West 190 Street, New York, NY, wherein the Rent Administrator 
          determined that the owner was entitled to a rent increase based on 
          a major capital improvement.

          The Commissioner has reviewed all of the evidence in the record and 
          carefully considered that portion of the record relevant to the 
          issue raised by the petition for administrative review.

          The owner commenced this proceeding on November 1, 1989 by filing 
          an application for a rent increase based on the building-wide 
          installation of new apartment windows at a total claimed cost of 
          $42,824.86. In support of the application, the owner submitted 
          copies of the contract and the cancelled checks.

          In response to the application several tenants, including the 
          petitioner-tenant, submitted answers objecting to the increase. 
          They contended, in substance, that the work done on the building is 
          the owner's responsibility and the cost incurred should not be 
          passed on to the tenants. Further, they posited that the replaced 
          windows were in better condition than the new ones and that the 
          work done on the new windows was of poor quality.

          On March 20, 1992 the Rent Administrator issued the order here 
          under review finding that the subject installation qualified as a 
          major capital improvement, 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 both rent controlled and rent 
          stabilized apartments.














          Adm. Rev. Docket GD510154.RT


          In the Petition for Administrative Review, the tenant requests 
          reversal of the Rent Administrator's order and contends, in 
          substance, that the front doors and the hallway windows have not 
          been replaced and, therefore, a rent increase should not have been 
          granted. 

          In response to the tenant's allegation, the owner argues that the 
          rent increase was specifically requested for the installation of 
          new apartment windows and that all work related to that 
          installation has been completed.

          After a careful consideration of the entire evidence of record, the 
          Commissioner is of the opinion that this petition should be denied.

          Rent increases for major capital improvements are authorized by 
          Section 2522.4 of the Rent Stabilization Code. Under rent 
          stabilization, the improvement must generally be building-wide; 
          depreciable under the Internal Revenue Code, other than for 
          ordinary repairs; be required for the operation, preservation, and 
          maintenance of the structure; and replace an item whose useful life 
          has expired.

          The Commissioner notes that the building-wide installation of new 
          apartment windows qualifies as a major capital improvement for 
          which a rent increase may be warranted. The record indicates that 
          the owner substantiated his application by submitting copies of the 
          contract and cancelled checks. The record confirms that the owner 
          correctly complied with the applicable procedures for a major 
          capital improvement rent increase.

          With regard to the tenant's claim that the front doors and hallway 
          windows have not been replaced, the Commissioner notes that the 
          owner did not apply for an increase based on the installation of 
          new front doors and hallway windows nor was one granted.

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

          ORDERED, that this administrative appeal be, and the same hereby is 
          denied; and 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