CG410062RT
                                  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.: CG410062RT  
                                                  
                                                RENT ADMINISTRATOR'S
                                                DOCKET NO.: BJ410158OR       
                    
                    Nina Solin,                               
            
                                                         
                                 PETITIONER  
          ----------------------------------x                      
                                                                       

            ORDER AND OPINION DENYING PETITION FOR ADMINISTRATIVE REVIEW     
                          
                    
               On July 6, 1988, the above-named petitioner-tenant filed a 
          petition for administrative review of an order issued on June 2, 
          1988 (and amended June 17, 1988), by the Rent Administrator, 
          concerning the housing accommodation known as 15 West 72nd Street, 
          New York, N.Y. Apt. 11-U, wherein the Administrator determined that 
          the owner's application for a restoration of rent based upon a 
          restoration of services should be granted, effective December 1, 
          1987.  The Rent Administrator's order noted that the tenant failed 
          to keep two scheduled appointments with the DHCR inspector and the 
          Rent Administrator restored the rent based upon the owner's 
          correction of water seepage and the crack in the kitchen ceiling.

               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.

               The issue herein is whether the Rent Administrator properly 
          restored the rent of the subject apartment.

               On appeal, the petitioner-tenant contended, among other 
          things, that although she received two inspection notices from the 
          DHCR, one notice did not go through the post office and had no 
          postal stamp; that both notices were received on the same day after 
          the scheduled inspection, and further that the owner forced her to 
          admit the owner's employees into the subject apartment for the 
          purpose of making repairs.

               The petition was served on the owner on August 17, 1988.













          CG410062RT

               The owner answered the petition alleging that the Rent 
          Administrator properly granted the owner's rent restoration 
          application and that the tenant has a long history of denying 
          repair access to the owner's employees and to DHCR inspectors.

               After a careful consideration of the entire evidence of record 
          the Commissioner is of the opinion that the administrative appeal 
          should be denied.

                      The Housing and Maintenance Code provides,

               S D26-10.07 Owner's right of access---No tenant shall refuse 
               to permit the owner or his agent or employee, to  enter  his
               dwelling unit or other space under his control to make repairs 
               or improvements required by this Code or  other  law  or  to
               inspect such apartment or other space to determine compliance 
               with this code or any other provision of law, if the right of 
               entry is exercised at a reasonable time  and  in  reasonable
               manner.  The department may by regulation restrict the  time
               and manner of such inspections.


               The record shows that the DHCR mailed two separate inspection 
          notices, properly addressed, to the tenant on April 5,  1988  and
          April 12, 1988,  but  that  the  tenant  failed  to  keep  either
          appointment.

               The Commissioner notes that the DHCR inspection staff made two 
          attempts to gain access to this apartment, without success and that 
          operating procedures mandate a maximum of two inspectorial visits.

               The record is also replete with evidence that the tenant has 
          previously frustrated the owner's efforts to make repairs in  the
          subject apartment.  The  owner  submitted  with  the  restoration
          application a copy of a letter, dated October 12, 1987, sent to the 
          tenant by certified mail, which described the owner's inability to 
          gain access to the subject apartment to make repairs, and directed 
          the tenant to contact the owner for an appointment for repairs.

               The Commissioner has considered the petitioner's claim  that
          the DHCR inspection notices were inadequate and finds this argument 
          to be without basis.  It is fundamental that letters  or  notices
          properly addressed and mailed  post-paid  are  presumed  to  have
          reached their destination and to have been delivered in due course.

               In the instant proceeding the inspection notices were mailed 
          to the tenant on April 5, 1988, and April 12, 1988, well before the 
          inspections  scheduled  for  April  11  and  19,  1988,  and  the
          petitioner's claim that they both arrived after April 19, 1988 is 
          not credible.
               The Commissioner also notes that the tenant's petition stated 
          that "the owner forced me to allow them to make repairs."  It  is






          CG410062RT

          apparent, therefore, that after several attempts, the owner gained 
          access to the subject apartment  and  completed  the  repair-work
          sometime after the appealed order was issued.

               Accordingly, the Commissioner finds that  the  Administrator
          properly based his determination on the entire record, and that the 
          Administrator properly restored the rent upon determining that the 
          tenant had denied access to the DHCR inspector.

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

               ORDERED, that this petition be,  and  the  same  hereby  is,
          denied, and that Administrator's order be, and  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