BI 430225-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.:   
                                                  BI 430225-RO               
                   FOTINI THEOHRIDOU,             
                                                  RENT ADMINISTRATOR'S      
                                                  DOCKET NO.: 
                                  PETITIONER      BF 430097-HW
          ----------------------------------x



           ORDER AND OPINION GRANTING PETITION FOR ADMINISTRATIVE REVIEW,
                  AND REVOKING ADMINISTRATOR'S RENT REDUCTION ORDER



          On September 16, 1987, the above-named petitioner-owner filed a 
          petition for administrative review of an order issued on August 12, 
          1987, by the Rent Administrator, concerning the housing accommoda- 
          tion known as 13 Carmine Street, New York, New York, Various apart- 
          ments, wherein the Administrator determined the tenants' complaint 
          of inadequate heat and hot water.  The Administrator granted the 
          tenants rent reductions building-wide, based on the owner's 
          apparent failure to respond to the tenants' allegations of service 
          decreases.

          On appeal, the owner points out that the owner answered by certi- 
          fied mail on August 6, 1987.  In fact, the owner's answer, stamped 
          received on August 7, 1987, appears not to have reached the case 
          docket in time for the Administrator's consideration.

          The owner's answer disputed the tenants' allegations of inadequate 
          heat and hot water, characterized the allegations of the five (5) 
          signatories to the complaint as "complete fabrications", documented 
          oil delivery bills for the period from October 1985 through May 
          1987, and pointed out that the owner was not cited for violations 
          by the City Office of Code Enforcement during the period.  In fact, 
          the owner had been cited on one (1) occasion in April, 1986 prior 
          to the complaint, for inadequate heat at 64 degrees F..  However, 
          inspections conducted for several weeks both prior to and after 
          that date reported the heat, as well as the hot water, to be 
          adequate.













          BI 430225-RO



          With the petition the owner also submits a copy of a statement, 
          signed by eight (8) tenants, to the effect that the owner supplied 
          adequate heat and hot water for the years from October 1985 through 
          1987 to the date of the petition.  Copies of the owner's petition 
          were served on the tenants.  Only one tenant responded, stating 
          that heat and hot water were adequate.

          Division records further reveal that the Administrator granted the 
          owner's application to restore rent per Docket No. BJ 430195-OR by 
          an order dated May 4, 1988.

          The record confirms that the owner filed a timely answer.  There- 
          fore, the Administrator's determination granting the tenants' rent 
          reductions based on the owner's apparent default was not correct 
          and must be revoked based on an irregularity in a vital matter.

          It is also highly unlikely that further investigation into seasonal 
          events, more than five years after the facts described, would 
          elicit additional information concerning the conditions alleged.  
          In light of the record presented below and on appeal, including the 
          statements of several tenants disputing other tenants' complaints 
          of inadequate heat and hot water and, in the absence of a DHCR 
          inspection, several inspections by the City Office of Code Enforce- 
          ment, finding no cause for the complaint, the Deputy Commissioner 
          is of the opinion that rent reductions were not warranted, and that 
          a remand for further consideration is not appropriate.


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

          ORDERED, that the owner's petition be, and the same hereby is 
          granted and the Administrator's order be, and the same hereby is 
          revoked.


          ISSUED:




                                                                       
                                             JOSEPH A. D'AGOSTA
                                             Acting Deputy Commissioner











          BI 430225-RO








    

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