STATE OF NEW YORK
DIVISION OF HOUSING AND COMMUNITY RENEWAL
OFFICE OF RENT ADMINISTRATION
92-31 UNION HALL STREET
JAMAICA, NEW YORK 11433
IN THE MATTER OF THE ADMINISTRATIVE ADMINISTRATIVE REVIEW
APPEAL OF DOCKET NO.: BA110207RT
EUGENE SPIVAC, DOCKET NO.: QS000247OR
ORDER AND OPINION DENYING PETITION FOR ADMINISTRATIVE REVIEW
On January 5, 1987, the above-named petitioner-tenant filed a
petition for administrative review of an order issued on December
26, 1986, by the Rent Administrator, concerning the housing
accommodation known as 260-22 73rd Avenue, Glen Oaks, N.Y., Apt.
83G13-2, wherein the Administrator determined that the owner's
application to restore the rent, which was filed on September 3,
1985, should be granted in whole in the amount of $23.20 per month,
effective September 1, 1985. The order was based upon the evidence
in the file including an inspection of the subject apartment, held
on November 29, 1985, which showed that services were restored.
The Commissioner has reviewed all of the evidence in the
record and has carefully considered that portion of the record
relevant to the issue raised by the administrative appeal.
The issue herein is whether the Rent Administrator properly
ordered restoration of the rent, effective September 1, 1985.
On appeal, the petitioner-tenant asserted that the Rent
Administrator erred by restoring the rent for refrigerator service,
effective September 1, 1985, because the owner replaced the
refrigerator in April, 1986, nine months after the Rent
Administrator's restoration date.
After a careful consideration of the entire evidence of record
the Commissioner is of the opinion that the administrative appeal
should be denied.
The owner commenced this proceeding by filing an Application
for Rent Restoration on September 3, 1985 stating that services for
which a rent reduction order had been issued by the Rent
Administrator under Docket No. 77025P had been restored.
A review of the reduction order reveals that the rent was
reduced based upon a showing of peeling paint on the window sills
and squirrels in the attic. No reduction in rent, however, was
issued for a defective refrigerator.
The petitioner's argument relating to an incorrect rent
restoration date for restoration of refrigerator services is
inapposite and misapplied.
A review of the file shows that the rent restoration order
dealt solely and properly with the owner's restoration of window
services and the elimination of the squirrel problem.
The petitioner's claims on appeal, as they pertain to the Rent
Administrator's date of rent restoration, constitute an
impermissible collateral attack on the underlying rent reduction
Inasmuch as the tenant did not appeal the reduction order, he
can not raise those issues in this rent restoration proceeding.
The Commissioner notes that the tenant, on appeal, did not
deny that the window sills were repaired and admitted to the DHCR
inspector that squirrels were no longer a problem.
Accordingly, the Commissioner finds that the Rent
Administrator properly restored the rent for the subject apartment,
effective September 1, 1985 and that the order under review is
THEREFORE, pursuant to the Rent Stabilization Law and Code, it
ORDERED, that this petition be, and the same hereby is,
denied, and that the Administrator's order be, and the same hereby
Joseph A. D'Agosta