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.: CL110188RO
ROOSEVELT MEWS ASSOCIATES RENT
ORDER AND OPINION GRANTING PETITION FOR ADMINISTRATIVE REVIEW
REVOKING ADMINISTRATOR'S ORDER AND RESTORING RENT
On December 7, 1988 the above named petitioner-owner filed a
Petition for Administrative Review against an order of the Rent
Administrator issued November 25, 1988. The order concerned housing
accommodations known as Apt. E located at 147-11 Roosevelt Ave.,
Flushing, N.Y. The Administrator denied the owner's rent
The Commissioner has reviewed the record and carefully
considered that portion relevant to the issues raised by this
The owner commenced this proceeding on May 12, 1988 by filing
a rent restoration application wherein it stated that it had
restored services for which a rent reduction order bearing Docket
No. BH110307S had been issued. The Commissioner notes that the
rent was reduced based on findings of peeling paint and plaster
throughout the bedroom walls and ceilings and cracks extending the
length of the ceiling.
The tenant was served with a copy of the application and
afforded an opportunity to respond. The tenant filed a response on
June 20, 1988 and stated, in sum, that the owner had restored the
services described above.
The Administrator ordered a physical inspection of the subject
apartment. The inspection was conducted on October 19, 1988 and
October 21, 1988. The inspector reported that there was a slight
crack in the paint and plaster of the bedroom wall and no cracks in
The Administrator issued the order here under review on
November 25, 1988 and denied the application.
On appeal the owner states, in sum, that the Administrator
erred in denying the application since all required repairs were
completed prior to the inspection. The petition was served on the
tenant on February 2, 1989.
The tenant filed a response on February 9, 1989 and confirmed
that the services ordered restored in the rent reduction order had,
in fact, been restored.
After careful review of the evidence in the record, the
Commissioner is of the opinion that the petition should be granted,
the order here under review should be revoked and the rent should
be ordered restored effective June 1, 1988.
The Commissioner's review of the record herein reveals that
the tenant's response to the application stated that the conditions
required to be restored had in fact been restored. Furthermore,
the inspector's report substantially confirmed this fact as did the
tenant's response to the petition. Based on the foregoing, the
Commissioner is of the opinion that the application should have
been granted effective June 1, 1988, 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, 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 June 1, 1988. If the tenant owes arrears
based on the Commissioner's decision herein, the arrears may be
paid off in twenty-four (24) equal monthly installments or
immediately if the tenant vacates the apartment.
JOSEPH A. D'AGOSTA