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.: CE210054RO      
                                                             DF210114RO
                                                             
          125 Eastern Associates c/o             RENT ADMINISTRATOR'S
          Phillip L. Billet,                     DOCKET NO.: BI210028OR           
                                                             CI210081OR
               
                                PETITIONER       PREMISES: 125 Eastern Parkway
                                                           Apt. 2E
                                                           Brooklyn, NY      
          -----------------------------------X                           
            ORDER AND OPINION DENYING PETITIONS FOR ADMINISTRATIVE REVIEW

          The above-named owner filed timely petitions for administrative 
          review of orders issued on May 9, 1988 (BI210028OR) and May 10, 1989 
          (CI210081OR) concerning the housing accommodations relating to the 
          above-described docket number.  

          These proceedings are consolidated because they involve common 
          issues of law and fact.

          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 this administrative appeal.

          Based on alleged restoration of services, the owner filed on 
          September 1, 1987 an application for rent restoration (BI210028OR).

          In an answer filed on March 3, 1988, the tenant asserted that the 
          defective conditions continue to exist.

          On March 15, 1988, a physical inspection of the subject apartment 
          was conducted by a DHCR staff member who reported that the kitchen 
          window is drafty, loose and needs refitting; that the apartment is 
          roach-infested; and that there is inadequate water pressure in the 
          bathroom to flush the toilet.

          By an order dated May 9, 1988, the Administrator denied the 
          application (BI210028OR).

          Another application (CI210081OR) was filed by the owner on September 
          28, 1988.

          On October 27, 1988, DHCR mailed a copy of the application to the 














          CE210054RO et al.

          tenant.

          A physical inspection of the subject apartment on April 18, 1989 was 
          conducted by a DHCR staff member who reported, in relevant part,  
          that the sashes of the kitchen windows are loose in its frames; the 
          kitchen and the bedroom are infested by roaches; and there is now 
          adequate water pressure.

          By an order dated May 10, 1989, the Administrator recognized that 
          there is now adequate water pressure, and denied the application 
          (CI210081OR) based on the continued existence of the remaining 
          defective conditions.

          In the petitions for administrative review, the owner contends that 
          the repairs to windows were completed; and there is monthly 
          extermination, with special servicing upon tenant's request. 
          Attached to the petition are copies of proposals and contracts.

          Copies of the petitions were mailed to the tenant on June 28, 1988 
          and September 14, 1989.

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

          The petitions do not establish any basis for modifying or revoking 
          the Administrator's orders which determined that the kitchen window 
          sashes are loose and allow air seepage and that there is roach 
          infestation in the bedroom and the kitchen. The alleged copies of 
          contracts and proposals fail to rebut the determination based on  
          March 15, 1988 and April 18, 1989 physical inspections which 
          confirmed the continued existence of these defective conditions, 
          warranting a denial of the applications. Accordingly, the 
          determinations were correct in all respects and are hereby 
          sustained.
           
          The Commissioner notes that another owner's rent restoration 
          application (FI210035OR) was denied on May 15, 1992.

          THEREFORE, in accordance with the Rent Stabilization Law and Code,
          it is

          ORDERED, that these petitions be, and the same hereby are, denied, 
          and that the Administrator's orders be, and the same hereby are, 
          affirmed.

          ISSUED:                                                   
                                          JOSEPH A. D'AGOSTA
                                          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