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

          -------------------------------------X   ADMINISTRATIVE REVIEW
          APPEALS OF                                             GJ610084RT;
                    VARIOUS TENANTS OF                           GJ630219RT 
                    2965 E. 196TH STREET
                    BRONX, NY                      RENT ADMINISTRATOR'S
                                                   DOCKET NOS.:  EK630054OM;


          The above named petitioner-tenants timely filed petitions for 
          administrative review (PARs) against orders issued on September 25, 
          1992, by a Rent Administrator (Gertz Plaza) concerning the housing 
          accommodations known as 2965 E. 196th Street, Bronx, NY, 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 concern orders issued  with 
          respect to the same building and involve common issues of law and 

          The Commissioner has carefully considered that portion of the 
          record relevant to the issues raised by these administrative 

          The owner commenced these proceedings on November 14, 1990, 
          (boiler/burner) and October 18, 1991, (new prime windows) by 
          initially filing applications for rent increases based on the 
          installation of the above mentioned items at a total cost of 
          $117,520.00 ($65,520-apartment windows and $52,000-boiler/burner).

          One (1) tenant responded to notice of the application filed with 
          respect to windows (FJ630081OM) and six (6) tenants responded to 
          the application with respect to the new boiler/burner (EK630054OM). 
          While arguing the denial of said application, the tenants did not 
          question the extent or quality of the installations albeit one 
          tenant noted that on one day heat and hot water had been turned off 
          while another tenant acknowledged that since the new installation, 
          adequate heat was being provided. 

          ADMIN. REVIEW DOCKET NO. GJ-610084-RT

          On September 25, 1992, the Rent Administrator issued both orders 
          here under review finding that the installations qualified as MCIs, 
          determining that the applications complied with the relevant laws 
          and regulations based upon the supporting documentation submitted 
          by the owner, and allowing rent increases for rent controlled and 
          rent stabilized tenants.

          In these petitions, various tenants contend, among other things, 
          that both MCIs were improper in that the heat and hot water are 
          inadequate and the windows are defective as well as drafty; that 
          the room count is incorrect; and that the building services are 

          In response to the tenants' petitions, the owner contends, among 
          other things, that these petitions should be denied because the 
          tenants failed to respond below; that many of the accusations are 
          false; that building department records can verify that the correct 
          room count is 152; and that the tenants' objection to the payment 
          of arrears relates to their claim that they were often without heat 
          with the old heating system (over 60 years old), which was why it 
          was replaced.

          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 both of 
          the instant applications were sent to the tenants' by the DHCR and 
          in fact various tenants responded thereto.  Since the tenants' 
          failed to raise any relevant objections with regard to the manner 
          and quality of the window and heating installations in the 
          proceeding below, said objections may not be considered for the 
          first time on appeal in accordance with established precedent and 
          Section 2529.6 of the Rent Stabilization Law and Code.  The same 
          principle applies to the question of room count which could readily 
          have been challenged while the proceeding was pending before the 


          ADMIN. REVIEW DOCKET NO. GJ-610084-RT

          The Commissioner notes from a review of Division records that there 
          were no heat and hot water complaints pending before the Division 
          or any rent reduction orders outstanding against the subject 
          premises based on the owner's failure to maintain services at the 
          time the Administrator's order was issued.  However, the 
          determination herein and the collectibility of the rent increases 
          in question may be effected by such decision as rendered in 
          connection with a proceeding currently pending before the Division 
          under Docket No. EH630103B. 

          Based upon the entire evidence of record, the Commissioner finds 
          that the Administrator's orders are correct and should be affirmed.

          The Commissioner further notes that this order and opinion is 
          issued without prejudice to the right of the tenants to file 
          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, 
          and the New York City Rent and Eviction Regulations, it is

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


                                                         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