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.:CC1100253RO
ORDER AND OPINION DENYING PETITION FOR ADMINISTRATIVE REVIEW
On March 16, 1988, the above-named petitioner-owner filed a
petition for administrative review (PAR) of an order issued on
March 7, 1988, by the Rent Administrator, concerning the housing
accommodation known as 93-49 222nd Street, Apt. 3T, Queens Village,
NY, wherein the Administrator denied owner's rent restoration
application because the conditions had not been corrected.
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.
This proceeding was commenced by the filing of a rent restoration
application by the owner on September 22, 1987. The application
alleged that the owner had restored services for which a rent
reduction order was issued on February 4, 1987 under docket number
AB-110832-S. In the application the owner stated that the windows
have been repaired. In answer to the application, the tenant
stated that the repairs to the windows are incomplete and done an
On January 25, 1988 an inspection was conducted by a Division
employee. The inspector reported that the windows had not been
repaired, resulting in the Administrator's order denying the rent
restoration on March 7, 1988.
Docket No. CC110253RO
In its PAR the owner contends that the window condition which is
cited in the Administrator's order is not related to the tenant's
original complaint. Furthermore, that the window sill cannot
possibly have loose panes "because the window sill does not have
any panes at all." Other contentions in the owner's PAR also
relate solely to the February 4, 1987 rent reduction order.
Challenges to that order are untimely in this petition. However,
a separate PAR filed by this owner on February 21, 1987 challenging
the February 4, 1987 rent reduction order has been addressed by the
Commissioner in Docket No. BB-110246-RO and a separate order will
be issued thereunder.
The Commissioner is of the opinion that this petition should be
In order for a rent restoration application to be granted, it must
be established that the conditions cited in the rent reduction
order have been corrected. In this case the rent reduction order
that the owner was seeking to have restored described the service
not being maintained as "Window sills in bedroom and livingroom
have loose panes, cracked and peeling paint and allow air seepage."
The only relevant inquiry in this proceeding is whether that
condition was corrected. Since inspector reported that there were
loose panes, peeling paint, and air seepage on the bedroom and
livingroom windows, the owner's application was properly denied.
The owner does not assert in his PAR that the necessary repairs
were completed and presents no basis for revoking or modifying the
As for the owner's observation that window sills do not have panes,
the Commissioner finds that despite the obvious confusion between
the terms sill and frame in the rent reduction order, the owner had
sufficient notice of the window condition to effect repairs. In
fact, the owner's application for rent restoration clearly states,
unequivocally, "The windows have been repaired."
THEREFORE, in accordance with the Rent Stabilization Law and Code,
ORDERED, that this petition be, and the same hereby is, denied and
the Rent Administrator's order be, and the same hereby is,
JOSEPH A. D'AGOSTA