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.: CC410171RO
DOCKET NO.: BF410615S
476 West 165th Realty Co.
c/o Harry Greenbaum,
PREMISES: 476 West 165th St.
New York, N.Y.
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
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.
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.
Joseph A. D'Agosta