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 NOS.: HB210009RT
          APPEALS OF                                            HB210185RT
                                                                HB210201RT
          Various Tenants of 1535 East 14th                     HB210245RT
          Street, Brooklyn, New York                            HB210251RT

                                                   RENT ADMINISTRATOR'S
                                  PETITIONERS      DOCKET NO.: FB210135OM
          -----------------------------------X

            ORDER AND OPINION DENYING PETITIONS FOR ADMINISTRATIVE REVIEW

          The petitioner-tenants timely filed administrative appeals against 
          an order issued on January 21, 1993 by the Rent Administrator (92- 
          31 Union Hall Street, Jamaica, New York) concerning  the  housing
          accommodations known as 1535 East 14th Street, Brooklyn, New York, 
          various apartments, wherein the Administrator granted major capital 
          improvement (MCI) rent increases for the stabilized apartments in 
          the subject premises.

          The owner commenced this  proceeding  below  by  filing  its  MCI
          application in February of 1991 for the installation of a heating 
          system, intercom and windows building-wide.  In  support  of  its
          application,  the  owner  submitted  copies  of  the   contracts,
          contractors' certifications, government approvals  and  cancelled
          checks.

          Two of the petitioner-tenants responded to  the  application  and
          stated, in substance, as follows:

          Apartment 1E

          Hot water is insufficient; windows were not  installed  properly,
          causing drafts and cold air to come into apartment; windows  were
          supposed to be adjusted but up until the present time nothing has 
          been done.

          Apartment 1B

          The rent has been increased for the upgrading of the incinerator, 
          for the cost of fuel, and, a few years ago, for storm windows; the 
          water heater is not effective; the new windows require adjustment 
          as promised when they were installed.
          ADMINISTRATIVE REVIEW DOCKET NOS.: HB210009RT et. al. 













          The owner responded to the tenants' objections by alleging that all 
          of the defective windows were repaired.

          In  rebuttal,  the  tenants  confirmed  that  repairs  have  been
          completed; however the windows do nothing to prevent the cold air 
          from seeping in.

          On January 21, 1993 the Rent Administrator 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 authorizing a rent increase of $10.70 per room, 
          per month (based on a total revised room count of  233)  for  the
          stabilized apartments. The Administrator reduced the claimed cost 
          of the heating system and the window installation based on a  MCI
          rent increase (Docket Number OM-4090) issued in July of 1983. The 
          increase was further reduced to $9.17 per room per month to reflect 
          a tax abatement offset for the life of the abatement.

          On appeal,  the  petitioner-tenants  contend,  in  substance,  as
          follows:

          Apartment 1L

          According to the order issued, apartment 2L  has  one  room;  and
          apartment 1L is identical in size and  layout  but  it  has  been
          allocated two rooms.

          Apartment 1E

          The windows are unsatisfactory, they are very draughty and the cold 
          air continues to come through.

          Apartment 6G

          According to the order issued, apartments 2G and 5G  contain  two
          rooms; the order should be modified to include  my  apartment  as
          having two rooms; and the hot water temperature fluctuates.

          Apartment 1B

          According to the order issued, apartment 2L  has  one  room;  and
          apartment 1B is the mirror image of apartment 2L.

          Apartment 1G

          According to the order issued, apartments 2G and 5G  contain  two
          rooms; apartments 1G, 2G, 3G, 4G, 5G, and 6G are all identical in 
          size and layout; and apartment 1G has been allocated three rooms in 
          error.
          ADMINISTRATIVE REVIEW DOCKET NOS.: HB210009RT et. al.

          In response to the  tenants'  petitions,  the  owner  stated  the
          following:







          Apartment 1L

          The owner claimed that a copy of the floor plan for apartment  1L
          which was submitted clearly indicates  that  it  is  a  two  room
          apartment. According  to  DHCR  definition  of  a  room  for  MCI
          processing, a windowless kitchen containing at least 59 square feet 
          constitutes a room. While the owner asserts that the floor plan for 
          apartment 1L indicates that the kitchen area is 7'4" by 9'0", the 
          Commissioner notes that those dimensions actually relate  to  the
          dining alcove and the windowless kitchen is shown as being 7' 4" by 
          7' 4" or approximately 53 square feet.

          Apartment 1E

          A copy of a letter submitted by the owner during the proceeding and 
          on appeal, dated September 24, 1992 and signed by the  tenant  in
          apartment 1E, states that the window repairs have been completed.

          Apartment 6G

          Heat and hot water are supplied as prescribed by law.

          Apartment 1B and 1G

          The rent for these tenants shall be adjusted to reflect the correct 
          number of rooms for these units (one room).

          After a careful consideration of the entire evidence of record, the 
          Commissioner is of the opinion that these administrative  appeals
          should be denied.

          At the outset the Commissioner notes, as confirmed by the record, 
          that the tenants of apartments 1L, 6G and 1G were served  by  the
          Administrator with notice of the instant application and that they 
          failed  to  respond  thereto.  Fundamental  principles   of   the
          administrative appeal process and  Section  2529.6  of  the  Rent
          Stabilization Code prohibit a party from raising issues on appeal 
          which were not raised below as the petitioner-tenants could  have
          raised the very issues before the Rent Administrator  which  they
          seek to raise for the first  time  on  appeal.  Accordingly,  the
          Commissioner is constrained to foreclose consideration  of  these
          issues in this proceeding.





          ADMINISTRATIVE REVIEW DOCKET NOS.: HB210009RT et. al.

          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 has expired.

          With regard to the contention of the tenant of apartment 1E,  the
          Commissioner requested that an inspection of the windows in  this
          unit be conducted on appeal. On  December  10,  1993  the  tenant
          contacted the inspector and  canceled  the  appointment  for  the
          inspection. The tenant stated a written notification will  follow
          but to date no further communication has been received.

          With regard to the petition filed by the tenants of apartments 1B, 
          1G and 1L to the effect that the amended room count is incorrect, 
          the Commissioner notes that the prior room count determination is 
          not, under the circumstances  of  this  case,  binding  upon  the
          Administrator and that the Administrator properly used a  reduced
          room count in accordance with Policy Statement 90-3 (February  8,
          1990) then in effect which defines a room  for  MCI  purposes  as
          follows:

               1) A windowless kitchen containing at least 59 square feet.

               2) An enclosed area with window containing at least 60 square 
                  feet.

               3) An enclosed area without window containing  at  least  80
                  square feet.

               4) Bathrooms, walk-in closets, etc. are excluded.

          The owner has stated that the room count for apartment 1B and  1G
          has been corrected. On June 3, 1993, the tenant in  apartment  1G
          confirmed that the room count has been adjusted accordingly.  The
          tenant of apartments 1L and 6G may commence a proceeding for rent 
          overcharges if the owner is collecting an increase which does not 
          correspond to the number of rooms in said apartment.

          With regard to the petition filed by the tenants of apartment 6G, 
          a review of Division records discloses that there were no  orders
          outstanding against the subject premises  based  on  the  owner's
          failure to maintain building-wide or individual apartment service 
          of heat and hot water at the time the Administrator's  order  was
          issued. The determination herein is without prejudice to the right 
          of the tenants to file an application for a rent reduction based on 
          a diminution of services, if the facts so warrant.

          ADMINISTRATIVE REVIEW DOCKET NOS.: HB210009RT et. al.

          On the basis of the entire evidence of record, it is found that the 
          Administrator's order is correct and should be affirmed.

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







          ORDERED, that these administrative appeals be, and the same hereby 
          are, denied; and that 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