BL420213RT
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.: BL420213RT
RENT ADMINISTRATOR'S
DOCKET NO.: BA520058OR
Jerry BARR,
PETITIONER
----------------------------------x
ORDER AND OPINION DENYING PETITION FOR ADMINISTRATIVE REVIEW
On December 21, 1987, the above-named petitioner-tenant filed
a petition for administrative review of an order issued on November
23, 1987, by the Rent Administrator, concerning the housing
accommodation known as 423 West 144th Street, New York, N.Y.,
Apt.#2, wherein the Administrator determined that the owner's
application for a restoration of rent should be granted based upon
a restoration of seven services for which a rent reduction order
was issued on February 18, 1986. The Maximum Legal Rent was
restored to the level in effect prior to the rent reduction plus
subsequent lawful increases, effective March 1, 1987. The Rent
Administrator's order specified that evidence in the file indicated
that the tenant refused access to the DHCR inspector on two
separate occasions.
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
restored the rent of the subject apartment.
On appeal, the petitioner-tenant asserted, among other things,
that he was out of the City at the time of the DHCR's scheduled
inspections and that is why access was not provided to the subject
apartment.
The petition was served on the owner on February 9, 1988.
After a careful consideration of the entire evidence of record
the Commissioner is of the opinion that the administrative appeal
should be denied.
BL420213RT
On January 2, 1987, the owner filed an application to restore
the rent of the subject apartment and an Affidavit of Compliance
was filed on January 12, 1987.
On February 25, 1987, the tenant filed an answer to the
owner's application alleging that the owner had not cleared
violations and had not restored services.
The Housing and Maintenance Code provides,
S D26-10.07 Owner's right of access---No tenant shall
refuse to permit the owner of his agent or employee, to
enter his dwelling unit or other space under his control
to make repairs or improvements required by this code or
other law or to inspect such apartment or other space to
determine compliance with this code or any other
provision of law, if the right of entry is exercised at
a reasonable time and in reasonable manner. The
department may by regulation restrict the time and manner
of such inspections.
The Commissioner notes that the DHCR inspection staff made
three attempts to gain access to this apartment, without success.
Operating procedures mandate a maximum of two inspectorial visits.
The record is also replete with evidence that the tenant has
previously frustrated the owner's efforts to make repairs in the
subject apartment.
Evidence in the file shows that in a Civil Court action before
Hon. Justice J. Goldman, under Index Number 63343/86, a "so
ordered" stipulation was entered into by the parties, in which, it
was specified that the tenant would provide access to the premises
for the purpose of correcting any violations which may exist in the
premises.
Moreover, the owner submitted a copy of a notice, dated
January 3, 1987, addressed to the tenant, which evinced owner's
inability to gain access to the subject apartment to make repairs.
The inspector's report of October 13, 1987, specified that the
tenant phoned the inspector on June 29, 1987, and cancelled the
inspection scheduled for June 30, 1987. The same report noted that
the tenant refused access on two rescheduled appointments, on the
advice of his lawyer.
BL420213RT
The Commissioner notes that the tenant by his actions has
negated manifold efforts to gain access to his apartment.
Accordingly, the Commissioner finds that the Administrator
properly based his determination on the entire record, and that the
Administrator properly restored the rent upon determining that the
owner had restored services and that the tenant had denied access
to the DHCR inspector.
THEREFORE, in accordance with the provisions of the Rent
Stabilization Law and Code, it is,
ORDERED, that this petition be, and the same hereby is,
denied, and the Administrator's order be, and same hereby is,
affirmed.
ISSUED:
___________________
Joseph A. D'Agosta
Deputy Commissioner
|
