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

          -------------------------------------X   ADMINISTRATIVE REVIEW
          APPEALS OF                               GF610311RT,   GG610265RT
                    VARIOUS TENANTS OF
                    2433 VALENTINE AVENUE          RENT ADMINISTRATOR'S
                    BRONX, NY                      DOCKET NO.:  FA630107OM



          The above named petitioner-tenants timely filed or re-filed 
          petitions for administrative review (PARs) against an order issued 
          on May 4, 1992, by a Rent Administrator (Gertz Plaza) concerning 
          the housing accommodations known as 2433 Valentine Avenue, Bronx, 
          New York, various apartments, wherein the Rent Administrator 
          determined that the owner was entitled to a rent increase based on 
          the installation of a major capital improvement (MCI).

          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 January 23, 1991, by 
          initially filing an application for a rent increase based on the 
          installation of the following items at a total cost of $19,925.00:  

          a)   apartment windows; and 
          b)   roof and coping stones.

          Subsequently, the owner withdrew that portion of the application 
          related to the roof installation resulting in a total claimed cost 
          of $18,750.00.

          The tenants responded to the owner's application by either agreeing 
          with the application or indicating a dissatisfaction with the 
          imposed increase for financial reasons.

          The owner did not respond to the tenants' allegations below.

          ADMIN. REVIEW DOCKET NOS. GF-610026-RT; GF-610311-RT; GG-610265-RT

          On May 4, 1992, the Rent Administrator issued the order here under 
          review finding that the installation qualified as an MCI, 
          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 
          controlled and rent stabilized tenants.

          The tenants raised on appeal essentially the same allegations as 
          those which they raised below.  The tenants additionally complained 
          of service problems related to the intercom system and mailboxes.

          In response to the tenants' petitions, the owner contends, in 
          substance, that the allegations have no merit.

          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 2202.4 of the Rent and Eviction Regulations for rent 
          controlled apartments and Section 2522.4 of the Rent Stabilization 
          Code for rent stabilized apartments.  Under rent control, an 
          increase is warranted where there has been since July 1, 1970, a 
          major capital improvement required for the operation, preservation, 
          or maintenance of the structure.  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 
          allegations raised on appeal are irrelevant to the MCI herein and 
          therefore, there are no issues to be determined by the Commissioner 
          at this time.


          ADMIN. REVIEW DOCKET NOS. GF-610026-RT; GF-610311-RT; GG-610265-RT

          However, the Commissioner deems it appropriate to mention that this 
          order and opinion is issued without prejudice to the right of the 
          tenants to file, with the DHCR, apartment services complaint with 
          respect to individual apartments in need of service and/or 
          building-wide service complaints with respect to the condition of 
          the building entrance doors and the intercom system which may 
          result in reductions from the current rents, if the facts so 
          warrant; and that tenants possessing a valid Senior Citizen Rent 
          Increase Exemption (SCRIE) may be eligible for some relief from the 
          increase herein.

          THEREFORE, in accordance with the Rent Stabilization Law and Code, 
          and the Rent and Eviction Regulations, 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