STATE OF NEW YORK
DIVISION OF HOUSING AND COMMUNITY RENEWAL
OFFICE OF RENT ADMINISTRATION
92-31 UNION HALL STREET
JAMAICA, NEW YORK 11433
IN THE MATTER OF THE ADMINISTRATIVE : ADMINISTRATIVE REVIEW
APPEALS OF DOCKET NOS.: GE 610027-RT
: GE 620040-RT
VARIOUS TENANTS OF GF 610045-RT
2475 PALISADES AVENUE, GF 610113-RT
BRONX, NY PETITIONERS :
DOCKET NO.: DL 630153-OM
ORDER AND OPINION DENYING PETITIONS FOR ADMINISTRATIVE REVIEW
Various tenants timely filed or refiled Administrative Appeals against an
order issued on March 27, 1992 by a Rent Administrator, 92-31 Union Hall
Street, Jamaica, New York, concerning the housing accommodations known as
2475 Palisades Avenue, Bronx, New York, Various Apartments, wherein a Rent
Administrator granted a major capital improvement (MCI) rent increase for
the controlled and stabilized apartments in the subject premises based on
the installation of apartment/hallway windows.
On December 21, 1989, the owner filed an application for a rent increase
based on the installation of new prime windows at the subject premises.
On April 3, 1990, the Division of Housing and Community Renewal served each
tenant with a copy of the application and afforded them an opportunity to
review it and comment thereupon. Various tenants responded stating
objections not pertinent to the installation; the tenants of apartments 1D,
3D, 4D, 6A and 6D responded alleging that windows in their apartments are
defective. Copies of the tenants' allegations were forwarded to the owner
who responded by stating that
In their petitions for administrative review the tenants of apartments 3B,
3D, 4D, and 6D request reversal of the Rent Administrator's order alleging
that windows are defective.
In answer to the tenants' petitions the owner responded submitted invoices
from the window company signed by tenants of apartments 3D and 6D, showing
that some windows were replaced and repaired.
However, the tenants of apartments 3D and 6D responded stating that no
repairs had been performed.
After careful consideration the Commissioner is of the opinion that these
petitions should be denied.
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
DOCKET NUMBER: GE 610027-RT, et al.
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 record in the instant case indicates that the tenants' allegations were
forwarded to the owner on January 29, 1991 and January 9, 1992. On January
24, 1992 the owner responded stating that all required repairs had been
made. Copies of the owner's response were forwarded to the tenants to
confirm whether or not the windows had been repaired. No tenant responses
were received however the Rent Administrator acted properly in deeming the
owner's assertion admitted in the absence of any tenant response to the
This order is issued without prejudice to the tenants' right to file an
application for a rent reduction based upon a decrease in services, should
the facts so warrant.
THEREFORE, in accordance with the Rent Stabilization Law and Code, and the
Rent and Eviction Regulations for New York City, it is
ORDERED, that these petitions be, and the same hereby are, denied and that
the Rent Administrator's order be, and the same hereby is, affirmed.
JOSEPH A. D'AGOSTA
Acting Deputy Commissioner