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.: CC110392RO
NATHAN KATZ RENT
ORDER AND OPINION GRANTING PETITION FOR ADMINISTRATIVE REVIEW
REVOKING ADMINISTRATOR'S ORDER AND RESTORING RENT
On March 1, 1988 the above named petitioner-owner filed a
Petition for Administrative Review against an order of the Rent
Administrator issued January 25, 1988. The order concerned housing
accommodations known as Apt. 5F located at 188-34 87th Drive,
Hollis, N.Y. The Administrator denied the owner's application for
The Commissioner has reviewed the record and carefully
considered that portion relevant to the issues raised by this
The owner commenced this proceeding on June 16, 1987 by filing
an application for rent restoration wherein it alleged that it had
restored services for which a rent reduction order bearing Docket
No. BD110004HW had been issued.
The tenant was served with a copy of the application and
afforded an opportunity to respond. The tenant filed a response on
September 2, 1987 and stated that hot water had been restored but
that the water temperature was scalding.
The Administrator ordered a physical inspection of the subject
apartment. The inspection was conducted on November 2, 1987 and
revealed that the hot water temperature in the kitchen and bathroom
exceeded 120 degrees.
The Administrator issued the order here under review on
January 25, 1988 and denied the application.
On appeal the owner states that the Administrator confused the
owner's application in Docket No. BD110004HW with another
proceeding. The owner further states that the proceeding in Docket
No. BJ110025HW concerned inadequate hot water while the hot water
temperature in this proceeding was found to be adequate. The
petition was served on the tenant on May 25, 1988.
The tenant did not file an answer but raised unrelated
complaints in correspondence sent to the Division on September 16,
After careful review of the evidence in the record, the
Commissioner is of the opinion that the petition should be granted.
The Commissioner has reviewed the record in Docket No.
BD10004HW and notes that the rent reduction in that case was based
on a finding of inadequate heat in the apartment and not inadequate
hot water. In the response to the owner's rent restoration
application as well as the response to the instant petition, the
tenant does not claim that the owner is not maintaining adequate
The Commissioner is of the opinion that since the order here
under review denied the rent restoration application based on a
condition that was not part of the rent reduction order, the order
must be revoked. Furthermore, since the tenant has not stated that
the owner is failing to maintain adequate heat and since there are
no additional complaints regarding inadequate heat and hot water
for the subject apartment, the Commissioner grants the owner's rent
restoration application. The rent is ordered restored effective
September 1, 1987, the first rent payment date following service of
the application on the tenant.
THEREFORE, pursuant to the Rent Stabilization Law and Code it
ORDERED, that this petition be, and the same hereby is,
granted, and that the Rent Administrator's order be, and the same
hereby is, revoked and that the rent be, and the same hereby is,
ordered restored effective September 1, 1987. If the tenant owes
arrears to the owner by reason of this order and opinion, the
arrears may be paid off in thirty six (36) equal monthly
installments or immediately if the tenant vacates the apartment.
JOSEPH A. D'AGOSTA