ADM. REVIEW DOCKET NO.: BG-210306 RO
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.:
BG-210306 RO
:
RENT ADMINISTRATOR'S
DOCKET NO.: 034249
2 WEST END AVENUE REALTY CO.
PETITIONER :
------------------------------------X
ORDER AND OPINION REMANDING PROCEEDING TO RENT ADMINISTRATOR
On July 10, 1987, the above-named petitioner-owner filed an
Administrative Appeal against an order issued on June 4, 1987 by
the District Rent Administrator, 92-31 Union Hall Street, Jamaica,
New York, concerning the housing accommodations known as 2 West End
Avenue, Brooklyn, New York, Apartment 2-L.
The issue herein is whether the District Rent Administrator
properly determined the tenant's objection to the 1984 apartment
rent/services registration.
On October 3, 1984, the tenant commenced the original
proceeding by filing with the Division a tenant's objection form to
the services registration statement filed by the owner. The tenant
alleged that the owner did not include therein a number of
apartment and building services.
On April 24, 1987,a copy of the tenant's objection to the
services registration was sent to the owner.
The District Rent Administrator's order, appealed herein,
determined inter alia, that the owner, in not filing an answer to
the tenant's objection, had defaulted and that as a result thereof,
the factual allegations of the tenant's objection were deemed
admitted. It further determined that the owner provides the
services cited in the tenant's objection, with the exception of
painting, which is a required service and need not be registered
and that the tenant is responsible for the maintenance of blinds
and screens. The registration was amended to reflect these facts.
ADM. REVIEW DOCKET NO.: BG-210306 RO
On appeal, the petitioner-owner asserts, in substance, that
the District Rent Administrator's order is erroneous, because an
answer was submitted below but was not considered.
After a careful consideration of the entire evidence of record
the Commissioner is of the opinion that the administrative appeal
should be remanded to the Rent Administrator for further
processing.
A review of the record reveals that the petitioner mailed an
answer to the tenant's objection to the DHCR by certified mail, on
May 27, 1987, and a signed certified mail receipt, dated May 29,
1987, was submitted as evidence thereof.
Additionally, the petitioner submitted a copy of the answer,
which contained the certified mail number corresponding to the
number on the certified mail receipt.
Accordingly, the Commissioner finds that due process requires
that this proceeding be remanded to the Rent Administrator for the
purpose of giving due consideration to the petitioner's answer.
THEREFORE, in accordance with the provisions of the Rent
Stabilization Law and Code, it is
ORDERED, that this petition be, and the same hereby is granted
to the extent of remanding this proceeding to the District Rent
Administrator for further processing in accordance with this order
and opinion.
ISSUED:
JOSEPH A. D'AGOSTA
Acting Deputy Commissioner
|