BH 130252-RO
                                  STATE OF NEW YORK
                      DIVISION OF HOUSING AND COMMUNITY RENEWAL
                            OFFICE OF RENT ADMINISTRATION
                                     GERTZ PLAZA
                               92-31 UNION HALL STREET
                                  JAMAICA, NY 11433


          ----------------------------------x
          IN THE MATTER OF THE ADMINISTRATIVE     ADMINISTRATIVE  REVIEW
          APPEAL OF                               DOCKET NO.:   
                                                  BH 130252-RO
                                                  RENT      ADMINISTRATOR'S
                 M. MALIK MANAGEMENT,        DOCKET NO.: 
                                                  QCS 000688-B
                                                  PREMISES: 
                                                  134-38 Maple Ave.,
                                   PETITIONER     Various Apts., Flushing, NY
          ----------------------------------x 
                          
                                                            
            ORDER AND OPINION DENYING PETITION FOR ADMINISTRATIVE REVIEW   


          The above-named owner filed a timely petition for  administrative
          review of an order issued concerning the  housing  accommodations
          relating to the above described docket number.

          The Commissioner has reviewed all the evidence in the record  and
          has carefully considered that portion of the record  relevant  to
          the issues raised by the petition. 

          The tenants commenced the proceeding on  November  18,  1985,  by
          filing a building-wide complaint asserting  that  the  owner  had
          failed to maintain numerous services  in  the  subject  building.
          The complaint was served on the owner on January 9, 1986.

          In his answer, dated February 20,  1986,  the  owner  denied  the
          allegations set forth in  the  tenant's  complaint  or  otherwise
          asserted that all required repairs  had  been  or  will  be  com-
          pleted.

          Physical inspections of the subject building were conducted by  a
          D.H.C.R. inspector on January 16, 1986 and February 8, 1987.  The 
          inspector confirmed the existence of defective conditions.

          The Rent Administrator directed restoration of these services and 
          further ordered, a rent reduction of $12.50  per  month  for  all
          rent controlled tenants in the building effective the first  rent
          payment following the issuance  of  the  order  and  a  guideline
          reduction for all stabilized tenants effective February 1,  1986.



          In his petition for administrative review, the owner  states,  in
          substance, that repairs have been performed, and that  the  owner
          was prejudiced by the delay in processing this case.   The  owner
          contends that if the inspection took place when  the  application
          was filed, there is no evidence  that  the  conditions  were  not
          corrected before the order was issued, and if the inspection took 






          BH 130252-RO
          place around the time the order was issued,  the  rent  reduction
          should be effective as of that date.

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

          Although the owner contends that repairs were  effectuated  prior
          to the issuance of the administrator's  order,  the  Commissioner
          notes that the owner submitted no evidence  to  substantiate  the
          contention either while the proceeding  was  pending  before  the
          administrator or by attachment to his  petition.   Moreover,  two
          physical inspections more than a year apart confirmed  that  many
          of the conditions complained of had not been  repaired.   Accord-
          ingly, based on a preponderance of the  evidence  the  owner  has
          offered insufficient reason to disturb the administrator's order, 
          and it should be affirmed.

          This Order and Opinion is issued without prejudice to the owner's 
          rights as they may pertain to an application to the Division  for
          a restoration of rent based upon the restoration of services,  if
          the facts so warrant.


          THEREFORE, in accordance with  the  Rent  Stabilization  Law  and
          Code, and the Rent and Eviction Regulations for New York City, 
          it is,

          ORDERED, that this petition be, and the same hereby  is,  denied,
          and the Rent Administrator's order be, and the  same  hereby  is,
          affirmed.


          ISSUED:



                                                                           
                                                   JOSEPH A. D'AGOSTA
                                                   Acting Deputy Commissioner
    

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

Subscribe to our Mailing List!
Your Email      Full Name