OFFICE OF RENT ADMINISTRATION
                                     GERTZ PLAZA
                               92-31 UNION HALL STREET
                               JAMAICA, NEW YORK 11433
          ------------------------------------X   ADMINISTRATIVE REVIEW
          APPEAL OF                                            HG110148RT
                    VARIOUS TENANTS                           
                                                  RENT ADMINISTRATOR'S
                               PETITIONERS        DOCKET NO:  GK110075OM 

          The above-named petitioners timely filed or refiled petitions for 
          administrative review (PARs) against an order issued on July 7, 
          1993, by a Rent Administrator (Gertz Plaza) concerning the housing 
          accommodations known as 189-03, 05, 07, 09, 15, and 17 Henderson 
          Avenue, Hollis, New York, various apartments, wherein the Rent 
          Administrator determined that the owner was entitled to a rent 
          increase based on 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 relevant to the issues raised 
          by these administrative appeals.

          The owner commenced this proceeding on November 13, 1992 by 
          initially filing an application for a rent increase based on the 
          installation of new windows at a total claimed cost of $13,524.00. 
          In support of his application, the owner submitted copies of the 
          contract and cancelled checks. None of the tenants submitted any 
          answer to the owner's application.

          On July 7, 1993, the Rent Administrator issued the order here under 
          review finding that the subject installation qualified as a major 
          capital improvement, determining that the application complied with 
          the relevant laws and regulations based upon the supporting 
          documentation submitted by the owner, and allowing an appropriate 
          rent increase for each of the apartments.

          In their petitions, the tenants contend, in substance, that they 
          were not afforded the opportunity to submit answers to the owner's 
          application since they were never served with a copy of the said 
          application. They also claim that the windows are loose and do not 
          lock properly and that their window screens were removed and never 
          replaced after the new windows were installed.

          Adm. Rev. Docket Numbers HG110105RT et. al.

          After a careful consideration of the entire evidence of record, the 
          Commissioner is of the opinion that this proceeding should be 
          remanded to the Rent Administrator for further processing.

          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 that for ordinary repairs; required for the operation, 
          preservation, and maintenance of the structure; and replace an item 
          whose useful life has expired.

          A review of the record in the instant case reveals that the 
          petitioner-tenants were never served with a copy of the owner's 
          application and were, therefore, not afforded an opportunity to 
          participate in the proceeding before the Rent Administrator. The 
          Commissioner notes that the premises in the instant proceeding is 
          a garden apartment complex with multi addresses, with each building 
          having two apartments. The automated computer system, in use by the 
          Division, is able to provide information on an individual 
          building/address basis. Since the building address was entered in 
          the computer as 189-03 Henderson Avenue when the application was 
          docketed, it means that the tenants of the five remaining addresses 
          were never served with a copy of the said application.

          In view of the foregoing, the Commissioner finds that due process 
          requires that this proceeding be remanded to the Rent Administrator 
          for the purpose of serving a copy of the owner's application upon 
          the tenants and affording them an opportunity to submit an answer.

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

          ORDERED, that these petitions be, and the same hereby are, granted 
          to the extent of remanding this proceeding to the Rent 
          Administrator for such further processing as is deemed necessary to 
          afford the tenants due process. The Rent Administrator's order 
          shall remain in full force and effect until such time that a new 
          order is issued upon remand.


                                                   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