CC410171RO

                                  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.: CC410171RO 
                                                  
                                                RENT ADMINISTRATOR'S
                                                DOCKET NO.: BF410615S       
               476 West 165th Realty Co.                                     
               c/o Harry Greenbaum,
                                                PREMISES: 476 West 165th St.
                                                          Apt. #1H
                                                          New York, N.Y.
                                 PETITIONER  
          ----------------------------------x                      
                                                                       

            ORDER AND OPINION DENYING PETITION FOR ADMINISTRATIVE REVIEW     
                          
               
               The above-named owner filed a timely petition for 
          administrative review of an order issued on February 8, 1988 
          concerning the housing accommodations relating to the above- 
          described docket number.

               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 petition.

               This proceeding was commenced on June 18, 1987 by the tenant 
          filing a complaint asserting that the owner failed to maintain 
          numerous services in the subject apartment.

               On August 18, 1987, the Division transmitted a copy of the 
          tenant's complaint to the owner.

               In an answer filed on September 28, 1987, the owner denied the 
          allegations as set forth in the tenant's complaint and otherwise 
          asserted that all required services are being provided and 
          maintained.

               A physical inspection of the subject apartment was conducted 
          on December 1, 1987 by a DHCR staff member who confirmed the 
          existence of numerous defective conditions.

               













          CC410171RO


               Based on the inspection, the Administrator determined that the 
          apartment is peeling paint and plaster throughout the walls and 
          ceilings; that the refrigerator requires a new gasket; that the 
          radiator is not properly secured to the floor; that the radiator 
          valve was substituted with a faucet handle; that the stove shakes 
          when the pressure is applied; and that part of the alarm system in 
          the apartment entrance door was removed when the door was replaced.

               In the petition for administrative review, the owner contends 
          in substance that the tenant refused access for the owner to make 
          repairs.  The owner submitted a copy of a postal form to show 
          mailings on February 12, 1988 to the Division and the apartments 
          concerned.  There is nothing in the petition to show what letters 
          were sent, whether these letters were by certified mail, or whether 
          there were return receipts.

               On May 27, 1988, the Division mailed a copy of the owner's 
          petition to the tenant.

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

               The owner's petition does not dispute the fact that the 
          Administrator's order was based upon a staff inspector's report 
          which found defective conditions within the apartment.  The 
          determination was in all respects proper and is hereby sustained.

               The contention that the tenant refused access was not raised 
          in the proceeding below prior to the issuance of the order appealed 
          from, and is now raised as an unsubstantiated assertion for the 
          first time on appeal.  Thus, this unproven claim is beyond the 
          scope of administrative review, which is limited to the issues and 
          evidence before the Administrator.

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

               ORDERED, that the petition for administrative review be, and 
          the same hereby is, denied, and that the Administrator's order be, 
          and the same hereby is, 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