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.: CA30066RT
DIANE NIXON, TENANTS REPRESENTATIVE RENT ADMINISTRATOR'S
DOCKET NO.: AJ430078OR
ORDER AND OPINION DENYING PETITION FOR ADMINISTRATIVE REVIEW
On January 19, 1988 the above named petitioner-tenant
representative filed a Petition for Administrative Review against
an order of the Rent Administrator issued December 17, 1987
concerning the housing accommodations known as various apartments,
3 East 66 Street, New York, NY, wherein the Administrator granted
the owner's rent restoration application.
The Commissioner has carefully reviewed all the evidence of record
and has carefully considered that portion relevant to the issues
raised on appeal.
A review of the record reveals that on October 7, 1986, the owner
filed an application to restore rent that had been reduced in an
order issued on June 30, 1986 in Docket No. LCS000524B. The rents
had been reduced building-wide based on a finding that there was no
superintendent on the premises and no address for one posted in the
public area, there was inadequate janitorial maintenance in that
the public areas required cleaning and there was an accumulation of
garbage in the basement, and there was roach and rodent infestation
in the basement.
The application was served on the tenants who had been awarded a
rent reduction. Several responded, stating in substance, that
there is still no resident full-time superintendent and the other
services have also not been restored.
A DHCR inspector visited the building on March 12, 1987 and
reported that there was no resident superintendent but the name and
telephone number of a super residing at 4 East 66 Street was
posted, that the public areas were clean , that there was no
evidence of accumulation of garbage in the basement, and that there
was not evidence of infestation in the halls or basement.
Based on the inspector's report, the order appealed herein was
issued granting the owner's rent restoration application.
In the petition for administrative review, the authorized tenant
representative asserts that there is no "resident" superintendent
if he lives at a different address, that the public areas are not
clean, that garbage is left uncollected over the weekends, and that
there as been only a temporary improvement in the infestation
problem. The tenants also question why the order was received only
from the landlord's attorney and why the effective date of the
restoration precedes the inspection date.
In answer to the petition, the owner states that a superintendent
in residence at 4 East 66 Street satisfies the requirements of the
Housing Maintenance Code, that garbage is removed daily except on
weekends, that exterminator service has not been curtailed, and
that the premises are in good condition.
After careful consideration of the entire evidence of record, the
Commissioner is of the opinion that the petition should be denied.
A review of the evidence of record supports the Administrator's
determination that services had been restores. The Rent
Administrator's order was properly based on the results of a
physical inspection which revealed that the name and address of a
superintendent in a nearby building was posted and that
superintendent and janitorial services were being adequately
provided. The tenants have not established any basis for modifying
or revoking the Administrator's determination to grant the owner's
In accordance with established policy the restoration for
stabilized tenants was made effective the first of the month
following service of the application on the tenants. There is no
basis for a later effective date.
THEREFORE in accordance with the Rent Stabilization Law and Code
and the Rent and Eviction Regulations for New York City, it is
ORDERED that this petition be and the same hereby is denied and the
Rent Administrator's order be and the same hereby is affirmed.
JOSEPH A. D'AGOSTA