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.:  HB230051RT,
          APPEALS OF                               HB230052RT,   HB230053RT,
                    VARIOUS TENANTS OF             HB230054RT,   HB230055RT,
                    225 EASTERN PARKWAY            HB230056RT,   HB230057RT,
                    BROOKLYN, NY  11238            HB230058RT,   HB230086RT,
                                                   HB230088RT,   HB230089RT,
                                                   HB230120RT,   HB230219RT 

                                                   RENT ADMINISTRATOR'S
                                                   DOCKET NO.:  FL230053OM

                                   PETITIONERS
          -------------------------------------X

            ORDER AND OPINION DENYING PETITIONS FOR ADMINISTRATIVE REVIEW

          On various dates, the above named petitioner-tenants timely filed 
          administrative appeals against an order issued on January 22, 1993 
          by the Rent Administrator (Gertz Plaza, Jamaica, New York) 
          concerning the housing accommodations known as 225 Eastern Parkway, 
          Brooklyn, New York, various apartments, wherein the Rent 
          Administrator granted the owner's major capital improvement (MCI) 
          application.  The Administrator authorized a rent increase 
          adjustment for rewiring.

          Since these petitions pertain to the same building and involve 
          common issues of law and fact, these appeals have been consolidated 
          for a uniform determination.

          The owner commenced this proceeding below by filing its MCI 
          application in December 1991.

          In response to the MCI application, the petitioners contended, in 
          substance, that (1) the work involved in the rewiring installation 
          consisted of electrical risers and circuit breaker boxes installed 
          in each apartment with an additional duplex outlet in the kitchen.  
          The installation however, did not include new wiring in other 
          rooms; (2) rewiring was necessary as the building management 
          neglected to maintain services; (3) the installation cost is 
          excessive for the amount of work completed; (4) the building was in 
          need of rewiring, therefore, the work completed should not be 
          considered a major capital improvement and (5) shortly after the 
          installation, there was an electrical fire in the building.  
          Moreover, tenant of apartment 3D stated that the rewiring 
          installation was completed prior to moving into the apartment.












          ADMIN. REVIEW DOCKET NO. HB-230051-RT ET. AL.

          The owner responded to the tenants' objections by contending, in 
          substance, that the rewiring work was completed according to the 
          regulatory guidelines set forth by the Agency.

          On January 22, 1993, 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.
           
          On appeal, the petitioner-tenants contended, in substance, that (A) 
          the electrical circuits in the basement were installed on the 
          exterior wall, subject to water infiltration; (B) the rewiring 
          installation consisted of a replacement of the fuse box with a 
          circuit breaker unit.  (C) no additional rewiring work done to 
          other rooms throughout each apartment; (D) the work was in 
          violation of the NYC Electrical Code and the NYC Department of 
          Buildings failed to properly inspect the rewiring installation and 
          (E) the tenants were not given an option to accept or decline the 
          rewiring installation in their apartments.  The tenant of apartment 
          3D states that the circuit breaker was being installed at the time 
          she moved into the apartment.

          In response to the tenant petitions the owner contends, in 
          substance, that the tenants bring forth no valid reason to reverse 
          or modify the determination of the Rent Administrator.  
          Furthermore, the rewiring installation was done according to the 
          guidelines set forth by the Division.

          After careful consideration of this entire record, the Commissioner 
          is of the opinion that these petitions should be denied.
           
          At the outset, the Commissioner notes that for an electrical 
          upgrading to qualify as an MCI under current procedures, the job 
          requires the installation of new electric service to the building, 
          new copper riser and feeders extending from the property box in the 
          basement to every housing accommodation of sufficient capacity (220 
          volts at the apartment panel) to accommodate the installation of 
          air-conditioner circuit outlets as well as the installation of two 
          duplex outlets in the kitchen to accommodate heavy duty appliances 
          (as performed in the case herein).  In addition, the tenants must 
          be given the option of having air-conditioning outlets installed in 
          their apartments at cost to the tenants.  The record herein 
          discloses that the owner substantiated its MCI application for the 
          rewiring work in the proceeding below by submitting to the 
          Administrator copies of the contract, cancelled checks, the 
          contractor's certification, and the Certificate of Electrical 
          Inspection issued by the NYC Bureau of Electrical Control for the 
          work in question, the governmental agency having jurisdiction for 
          the verification and the approval thereof.  
                                          2






          ADMIN. REVIEW DOCKET NO. HB-230051-RT ET. AL.

          Moreover, the owner is not required to install an outlet in every 
          room for the work to qualify for an MCI rent increase, nor is 
          tenant consent required for work which comprises a major capital 
          improvement.

          With regard to the contention by the tenant of apartment 3D, the 
          Division has ruled that where a tenant takes occupancy prior to the 
          filing of an MCI application, the owner is not required to provide 
          specific notice in the tenant's vacancy lease since the application 
          was not filed with the Division and the tenant received the same 
          notice as all other tenants.  However, for the MCI increase to be 
          collectible during the lease term then in effect, such lease must 
          contain a general authorization provision for the collection 
          thereof.  The tenant may look to the terms of her lease (a copy of 
          which is not submitted) and the determination herein is without 
          prejudice to the tenant filing an appropriate complaint of rent 
          overcharge, if the facts so warrant.

          This order and opinion is issued without prejudice to the tenants, 
          or any one of them, filing a complaint with the Division based on 
          a reduction of services or rent overcharge, if the facts so 
          warrant.                        

          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 and Operational bulletin 84-1, it is

          ORDERED, that the 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











                                          3






    

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