STATE OF NEW YORK
DIVISION OF HOUSING AND COMMUNITY RENEWAL
OFFICE OF RENT ADMINISTRATION
92-31 UNION HALL STREET
JAMAICA, NEW YORK 11433
IN THE MATTER OF THE ADMINISTRATIVE ADMINISTRATIVE REVIEW
APPEAL OF DOCKET NO.:
BETTERLAND REALTY CORP., RENT ADMINISTRATOR'S
PREMISES: 34-25 150 Pl.
PETITIONER Apt. 5-A, Flushing, NY
ORDER AND OPINION DENYING PETITION FOR ADMINISTRATIVE REVIEW
The above-named owner filed a timely petition for administrative
review of an order issued on October 23, 1987 concerning the
housing accommodations relating to the above-described docket
The issue in this appeal is whether the Administrator's order was
The Commissioner has reviewed all of the evidence in the record and
has carefully considered that portion of the record relevant to the
issues raised by the administrative appeal.
This proceeding was commenced on August 4, 1986 by a rent-
stabilized tenant filing a complaint asserting that the owner had
failed to maintain numerous services in the subject apartment.
On September 17, 1986, the Division sent the owner a copy of the
In an answer filed on February 5, 1987, the owner stated in sub-
stance that all services are being maintained and repairs have been
Thereafter, a physical inspection of the subject apartment was
conducted by a Division staff member who confirmed the existence of
Based on the inspection report, the Administrator determined that
the exhaust vents in bathroom and kitchen are not working; that the
windows permit air seepage; and that there is roach infestation.
The Administrator directed the restoration of services and a
reduction of the stabilized rent.
In the petition for administrative review, the owner contended in
substance that extermination services are provided; that the
intercom system is new; that the vent system is functioning prop-
erly; and that the windows have all been replaced.
On March 18, 1988, the Division mailed the tenant a copy of the
In an answer filed on April 4, 1988, the tenant stated in substance
that although the windows had been replaced and the intercom fixed,
the vent system is still malfunctioning and extermination services
not provided. The tenant further asserted for the first time, that
his apartment has no baseboard molding; that his apartment is in
need of painting; and that his bathroom ceiling and walls are in
need of repair.
After a careful consideration, the Commissioner is of the opinion
that the petition should be denied.
The Administrator's order was based upon a staff inspector's report
which found decreased service within the apartment. This determi-
nation was in all respects proper and is hereby sustained. The
owner's answer in the proceeding below prior to the issuance of the
Administrator's order that repairs were made is belied by the
inspection report. The owner's allegation in the petition that
repairs were completed fails to disturb the Administrator's order
which was correct when issued.
The tenant's claims of defective conditions which were not the
subject of the Administrator's order may not be determined in this
proceeding and may be subject matter for a new complaint, if the
facts so warrant.
The owner's rent restoration application under Docket No EJ-
110064OR, was granted on February 28, 1991.
THEREFORE, in accordance with the Rent Stabilization Law and Code,
ORDERED, that this petition be, and the same hereby is, denied and
that the Administrator's order be, and the same hereby is,
JOSEPH A. D'AGOSTA