DHCR Decisions
FE 210350-RT
STATE OF NEW YORK
DIVISION OF HOUSING AND COMMUNITY RENEWAL
OFFICE OF RENT ADMINISTRATION
GERTZ PLAZA
9-31 UNION HALL STREET
JAMAICA, NEW YORK 11433
----------------------------------x
IN THE MATTER OF THE ADMINISTRATIVE ADMINISTRATIVE REVIEW
APPEAL OF DOCKET NO.:
FE 210350-RT
OLGA SCHYKEBYNEC, RENT ADMINISTRATOR'S
DOCKET NO.:
PETITIONER CK 230215-OM
----------------------------------x
ORDER AND OPINION DENYING PETITION FOR ADMINISTRATIVE REVIEW
On May 22, 1991, the above-named tenant, filed a petition for
administrative review of an order issued on May 15, 1991, by a
Rent Administrator concerning the housing accommodation, known
as Apartment E-8, 380 92nd Street, Brooklyn, New York wherein
the Rent Administrator determined that the owner was entitled to
a rent increase based on a major capital improvement (MCI).
The Commissioner has reviewed all of the evidence in the record
and has carefully considered that portion of the record relevant
to the issues raised by the petition for review.
The owner commenced this proceeding on November 25, 1988 by
filing an application for a rent increase based on major capital
improvements, to wit - replacement windows at a total cost of
$53,785.00.
On February 23, 1989, the Division of Housing and Community
Renewal (DHCR) served each tenant with a copy of the application
and afforded the tenants the opportunity to review it and comment
thereupon.
The tenant did not file an objection to the owner's application
although afforded the opportunity to do so.
On May 15, 1991, the Rent Administrator issued the order here
under review finding that the installations 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 appropriate
rent increases for rent controll d and rent stabilized apart-
ments.
In her petition for administrative review, the tenant requests
reversal of the Rent Administrator's order and objects to the
retroactive increase because she is a senior citizen.
In answer to the tenant's petition the owner alleges that the
FE 210350-RT
tenant does not have a valid rent increase exemption certificate.
After careful consideration the Commissioner is of the opinion
that this petition should be denied.
Rent increases for major capital improvements are authorized by
Section 2522.4 of the Rent Stabilization Law for rent stabilized
apartments. Under rent stabilization, the improvement mu t gen-
erally be building-wide; depreciable under the Internal Revenue
Code, other than for ordinary repairs; required for the opera-
tion, preservation, and maintenance of the structure; and replace
an item whose useful life has expired.
The record in the instant case indicates that the owner correctly
complied with the application procedures for a major capital
improvement and the Rent Administrator properly computed the
appropriate rent increases. The tenant has not established that
the increase should be revoked.
The tenant is advised that only those tenants with a valid Senior
Citizen Rent Increase Exemption (SCRIE) are exempt from that por
tion of the MCI increase which causes the rent to exceed 1/3 of
the total household disposable income. This exemption applies
to installations completed after September 1, 1986.
THEREFORE, in accordance with the Rent Stabilization Law and
Code, it is
ORDERED, that this petition be, and the same hereby is, denied
and that the Rent Administrator's order be, and the same hereby
is, affirmed.
ISSUED:
ELLIOT SANDER
Deputy Commissioner
|