ADM. REVIEW DOCKET NO.: BH 110230 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.:
BH 110230 RO
:
DRO DOCKET NO.:
AJ 110528-S
E & S REALTY CO.
ROSE WOLF, Premises: 144-03 Barclay
Ave., Apt. #5B
Flushing, NY
PETITIONER :
------------------------------------X
ORDER AND OPINION DENYING PETITION FOR ADMINISTRATIVE REVIEW
The above-named owner timely filed a petition for
administrative review of an order issued concerning the housing
accommodations relating to the above described docket number.
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.
On October 29, 1986, the tenant commenced the proceeding
below by filing a complaint of decrease in services asserting
that the owner had failed to paint the apartment since he moved
in during 1979.
On December 2, 1986, the owner was served with the
complaint and afforded twenty days to interpose an answer.
The owner did not interpose an answer to the tenant's
complaint.
On June 8, 1987, an inspection was conducted by a Division
inspector. The inspector stated in his report that the ceilings
in all rooms had peeling paint and badly flaking plaster with
cracks. The inspector further stated in his report that the
walls in all the rooms had peeling paint and plaster and that the
subject premises needed painting and plastering.
On July 31, 1987, the Rent Administrator directed
ADM. REVIEW DOCKET NO.: BH 110230 RO
restoration of these services and further ordered, a reduction of
of the stabilization rent.
In the petition, the owner states that on December 18, 1986,
she and the tenant mutually agreed to have the apartment painted
during January 1987. The owner asserted that a copy of this
agreement was hand delivered to the Division. The owner went on
to state that subsequent to the agreement, the tenant left the
United States on a trip, and that the tenant's wife refused to
allow any work to be performed inside the apartment. In
addition, the owner states that the apartment was painted on
August 14 and 15 of 1987.
The Commissioner is of the opinion that the petition should
be denied.
The owner's claims regarding her agreement with the tenant,
the subsequent denial of access and the painting of the apartment
during August 1987 are not part of the record below. Thus, they
are beyond the scope of review of administrative appeals which is
limited to a review of facts or evidence before the Rent
Administrator. Moreover, the existence of any agreement with the
tenant is unproven, in that the copy attached to the petition is
not signed by the tenant. Assuming arguendo, that said agreement
did exist, the owner was served with the complaint on December 2,
1986, and the order here under review was issued on June 8, 1987,
allowing the owner over seven months to have either painted the
apartment or notified the Rent Administrator that access to the
apartment was denied by the tenant.
Based on a preponderance of the evidence, the Commissioner
finds that the order here under review was warranted.
The Commissioner notes that on March 9, 1988, the owner's
application for a restoration of rent, based on a restoration of
services, under docket number BH 110156-OR, was granted.
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:
JOSEPH A. D'AGOSTA
Acting Deputy Commissioner
|
