STATE OF NEW YORK
DIVISION OF HOUSING AND COMMUNITY RENEWAL
OFFICE OF RENT ADMINISTRATION
92-31 UNION HALL STREET
JAMAICA, NEW YORK 11433
------------------------------------X ADMINISTRATIVE REVIEW
IN THE MATTER OF THE ADMINISTRATIVE DOCKET NO.: BG630262RO
PETITIONER DOCKET NO: BCS000383OM
ORDER AND OPINION REMANDING PROCEEDING ON APPEAL
On July 27, 1987 the above named petitioner-owner timely filed a
petition for administrative review (PAR) against an order issued
June 30, 1987 by a Rent Administrator (Gertz Plaza) concerning the
housing accommodations known as 60 East 196th Street, Bronx, New
York, various apartments, wherein the Administrator denied the
owner's application for a major capital improvement rent increase
upon finding that the owner failed to submit information necessary
to process the application.
On September 23, 1987, the Commissioner issued an Order and Opinion
rejecting the petition due to the petitioner's failure to submit a
list of the tenants affected by the determination. Said order
afforded the petitioner fifteen (15) days in which to submit a
procedurally correct petition.
Subsequent thereto, the petitioner instituted an Article 78
proceeding in the Supreme Court, alleging that he could not submit
the tenants' names, since the Administrator's order described the
tenants as "various".
On January 15, 1988, a court order was signed remitting the
proceeding to the Division for further processing.
Thereafter, in a letter dated March 10, 1988, the owner was
afforded fifteen (15) days to submit the required list of tenants.
Not having received the required list, on May 17, 1988, the
Commissioner issued an order dismissing the petition.
Subsequent to the dismissal of the petition, the owner submitted
proof of service showing that he had submitted a list of tenants to
the DHCR within the required time period, on March 17, 1988.
Adm. Rev. Docket No. BG630262RO
Based upon the foregoing, the Commissioner revoked the Dismissal
Order on May 20, 1988 in a Order and Opinion Reopening
Administrative Review Proceeding for Further Consideration and set
aside the Petition for further determination at administrative
The Commissioner is of the opinion that this proceeding should be
remanded to the Administrator for further processing.
The owner commenced this proceeding on November 18, 1985 by
initially filing an application for a rent increase based on the
installation of the following items at a total claimed cost
$271,435.00: "equipment"; a boiler/burner; concrete flatwork; doors
- main entrance and lobby; hollow metal apartment doors; sealing
of dumbwaiters; masonry work; mailboxes; parapet; a roof surface;
pointing; smoke detectors; steel lentils; waterproofing-stucco;
aluminum windows; a fence and gates, and plastering.
Three tenants objected to the application, alleging in substance,
that the roof was done in 1984 not 1985; that the boiler was
installed in 1984 not 1985; that the prior landlord installed the
boiler; that the front door in lobby has no lock; and that the main
entrance doors are not locked. One tenant stated that the price of
the boiler is higher than the price quoted by the prior landlord,
that the hollow metal door replaced a wooden door to his apartment
and the new mailbox in lobby replaced mail delivery to his
The order of the Rent Administrator denied the owner's application
upon finding that the owner failed to submitt information requested
on December 23, 1985 and April 10, 1987.
In his petition the owners contends, in substance that he never
received "Notice and Transmittal of Tenant's Complaint".
The evidence of the record in the instant case indicates that both
of the aforementioned Requests for Additional Information were sent
to the owner's address setforth on the application; and that the
second notice was not sent to the newly registered address of the
owner's management agent.
In view of the foregoing the Commissioner deems it appropriate to
remand this proceeding to the Administrator for further processing
of the application on its merits, and upon notice to all current
tenants of the subject premises who should be afforded the
opportunity to respond thereto.
Adm. Rev. Docket No. BG630262RO
THEREFORE, in accordance with the Rent Stabilization Law and Code,
and the New York City Rent and Eviction Regulation, 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
JOSEPH A D'AGOSTA