DHCR Petition for Administrative Review (PAR) Decisions
In 1994, under pressure from tenant advocates, DHCR released approximately 6,000 PAR decisions. After Governor Pataki took office in 1995, DHCR refused to release other decisions in bulk. These decisions generally cover the 1990-1994 period and in many cases do not reflect current law or DHCR practice. The reader is cautioned to be aware of changes to the Rent Stabilization Law, the Rent Stabilization Code and DHCR practice since 1994. Also this database does not include all decisions prior to 1994 as DHCR intentionally withheld many decisions for unknown reasons.

Accessing the decisions

Search DHCR decisions by keyword

 

Note: Search must contain at least four characters.

    Contains all words
    Contains the exact phrase
    Contains at least one word
   or ... Browse decisions by docket number
   or ... Download compressed zip files of all decisions


DHCR Decisions



                                 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 
       IN THE MATTER OF THE ADMINISTRATIVE :  ADMINISTRATIVE REVIEW
       APPEAL OF                              DOCKET NO. AJ 130083-RT
                                           :  
                                              RENT ADMINISTRATOR'S 
          ISIS HABASHY,                       DOCKET NO. QCS 000348-OM
                             PETITIONER    : 
       ------------------------------------X                             

              ORDER AND OPINION DENYING PETITION FOR ADMINISTRATIVE REVIEW

       On September 29, 1986, the above-named tenant refiled a petition for 
       administrative review of an order issued on July 22, 1986, by a Rent 
       Administrator concerning the housing accommodation known as Apartment 3D, 
       21-71 27th Street, Astoria, New York, wherein the Rent Administrator 
       determined that the owner was entitled to a rent increase based on a major 
       capital improvement.

       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 administrative review.

       The owner commenced this proceeding on December 6, 1984 by filing an 
       application for a rent increase based on a major capital improvement, to 
       wit: pointing and waterproofing and 1000 square feet of new roofing at a 
       total cost of $4,240.93.

       The owner certified that on July 22, 1985, he served each tenant with a 
       copy of the application and submitted one copy of the entire application 
       including all required supplements and supporting documentation to the 
       DHCR.  The petitioner herein responded to the application alleging that 
       the claimed improvements were not done properly and that when it rains, 
       tar from the roof leaks into her apartment.

       On July 22, 1986, the District Rent Administrator issued the order here 
       under review granting, in part, the application predicated on the pointing 
       and waterproofing of the subject premises.  So much of the application as 
       pertained to partial roof repair was disallowed as not qualifying as a 
       MCI.

       In the petition for administrative review, the tenant requests reversal of 
       the District Rent Administrator's order and contends, in substance, that 
       she should not be required to pay the rent increase unless the owner first 
       corrects the condition of a persistent roof leak allegedly resulting in 
       tar and mold deposits on the ceilings throughout her apartment.

       In answer to the tenant's petition the owner alleges that, among other 
       things, the tenant poorly maintains her apartment.

       After careful consideration the Commissioner is of the opinion that this 
       petition should be denied.







          DOCKET NUMBER: AJ 130083-RT
       The record discloses that the owner substantiated his application, to the 
       extent recognized by the Administrator (no increase was granted for roof 
       repairs) by the submissing of supporting documentation including copies of 
       a contract, contrator's certification, diagram of the areas where pointing 
       and waterproof work was performed together with copies of cancelled checks 
       in substantiation of the cost thereof.  The record further discloses that 
       the Administrator's order was issued after the owner's advisement that 
       arrangements had been made to correct conditions complained of by the 
       tenant and the tenant's failure to respond to further inquiring by an 
       Administrator in connection with a related proceeding under Docket No. 
       QS 003707-S which was terminated on April 18, 1986.

       Based upon the entire record, the Commissioner finds that the order of 
       the Administrator appealed herein is correct and should be affirmed.

       The determination herein is without prejudice to the right of the tenant 
       filing an appropriate complaint if the owner is not now maintaining all 
       required services.

       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 order of Rent Administrator be, and the same hereby is, affirmed.

       ISSUED:






                                                                     
                                            JOSEPH A. D'AGOSTA
                                        Acting Deputy Commissioner
                                           
    
   

The New York State Division of Housing and Community Renewal (DHCR) is the state agency that administers the Rent Stabilization and Rent Control systems. DHCR has jurisdiction over many aspects of the landlord-tenant relationship, including the legal rent, the providing of various services and complaints of landlord harassment. In addition, landlords are able to apply to DHCR for increases in rent based on Major Capital Improvements or for other reasons.

Tenants and Landlords may initiate proceedings by filing complaints or applications with DHCR. After the agency collects evidence from both the tenant and landlord, it renders a decision by the District Rent Administrator (DRA) -- sometimes referred to as the District Rent Office (DRO).

Either party may then appeal the decision at the agency level by filing a Petition for Administrative Review (PAR) within 35 days. A PAR decision -- or sometimes called a Commissioner's Decision -- represents the final decision of the agency before parties may appeal in the state courts.

TenantNet Home | TenantNet Forum | New York Tenant Information | Contact Us
DHCR Information | DHCR Decisions | Housing Court Decisions | New York Rent Laws |

Subscribe to our Mailing List!
Your Email:   
Your Name: