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  (SJR 5637)
     IN THE MATTER OF THE ADMINISTRATIVE :  ADMINISTRATIVE REVIEW
     APPEAL OF                              DOCKET NO.: CK 630128-RO
                                         :              
                                            RENT ADMINISTRATOR'S DOCKET 
       PARKOFF BAINBRIDGE                   N0.: AK 630203-OM
       ASSOC.              PETITIONER    : 
     ------------------------------------X                             


              ORDER AND OPINION REMANDING PROCEEDING TO ADMINISTRATOR


     On November 21, 1988 the above named petitioner-owner filed a Petition for 
     Administrative Review against an order of the  Rent  Administrator  issued
     October 18, 1988.  The order concerned housing accommodations  located  at
     2705  Bainbridge  Avenue,  Bronx,  New  York.   The  Administrator  denied
     petitioner's application for a building-wide rent increase.

     Thereafter the owner commenced a proceeding in the Supreme Court  pursuant
     to Article 78 of the Civil Practice Law and Rules,  seeking  an  order  of
     the court directing the Division to determine its petition.  This resulted 
     in remanding the proceeding to the Division for further consideration.

     The Commissioner has reviewed the record  and  carefully  considered  that
     portion relevant to the issues raised by this administrative appeal.

     The owner commenced the proceeding on November  11,  1986,  by  filing  an
     application for a rent increase due to the installation of  major  capital
     improvements, to wit-new roof, elevator, burner/boiler  and  windows.   On
     April 19, 1982 the owner certified that each tenant had been served with a 
     copy of the application and had been afforded an opportunity to respond

     On October 15, 1987 the Administrator sent  a  notice  to  the  petitioner
     requesting the following additional data to process the application:

          - signatures on the contractor's statement with dates of 
            completion

          - the total square footage of the roof and the square footage of
            the area replaced

          - the total number of windows in the building and the number   of
            windows   replaced.  Balance of cancelled checks 

          - approvals for burner/boiler and additional cancelled checks

          - cancelled checks and approval for elevator








          DOCKET NUMBER: CK 630128-R0
     On October 30, 1987 the petitioner  requested  an  extension  of  time  to
     provide the information.  That extension was granted and on  December  11,
     1987, the owner submitted copies of letters it had  sent  to  the  various
     vendors demanding signatures and other information.  Another  request  for
     information was sent to the owner on April 15, 1988 in response  to  which
     the owner 
     stated, on May 18, 1988 that it was ready, and willing, and able to comply 
     but had experienced a change in personnel and needed another extension  of
     time.

     On October 18, 1988 the Administrator issued  the  order  appealed  herein
     denying the application, citing the owner's failure  to  submit  necessary
     information and material.

     In its petition the owner seeks reversal  of  the  Administrator's  order,
     stating that when the application was filed in late  November  1986;  that
     proper cancelled checks and bills were  submitted;  that  service  of  the
     application on the tenants was not completed until April 1987; that almost 
     seven months passed until the first notice was sent for production of  the
     additional information described above;  and  that  personnel  changes  in
     the owner's company forced a late response to the  notice.

     Petitioner argues that a review of the application by the Administrator
     would have provided the necessary  information  regarding  the  number  of
     windows installed and the square footage of the replaced  portion  of  the
     roof; and that it experienced difficulty in obtaining the balance  of  the
     material required by the Administrator from the contractor which delayed a 
     full and complete submission until June 28 and July 11, 1988.   The  owner
     included  with  the  petition  copies  of   letters   addressed   to   the
     Administrator, dated June 28 and July 11, 1988, transmitting the requested 
     documents including cancelled checks, signed contractor's statements,  and
     all necessary approvals and permits.  The owner also  enclosed  copies  of
     two receipts for certified mail sent to the Administrator on June  28  and
     July 11, 1988.

     After  careful  consideration  of  the  evidence  in   the   record,   the
     Commissioner is of the opinion that this proceeding should be remanded  to
     the Administrator for further processing.

     The owner has adequately established that  it  did  comply  with  all  the
     Administrator's requests for information (some of which was indeed readily 
     available in the owner's application) well before the  order  was  issued.
     However, the submissions, made on June 28 and July 11, 1988  by  certified
     mail did not reach the appropriate file.

     Accordingly, the Commissioner finds that this matter must be  remanded  to
     the Administrator for such further processing as may be necessary  of  the
     owner's application including consideration of  the  tenant's  allegations
     regarding the adequacy of the work performed, and, if warranted,  ordering
     appropriate  rent  increases  for  rent  controlled  and  rent  stabilized
     tenants.

     THEREFORE, pursuant to the  Rent  Stabilization  Code  and  the  Rent  and
     Eviction Regulations for New York City, it is








          DOCKET NUMBER: CK 630128-R0
     ORDERED, that this petition be, and the same hereby  is,  granted  to  the
     extent of remanding this proceeding to the Rent Administrator for  further
     processing consistent with this order and opinion.

     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