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.: CC210208RT
BETTYE JEWEL BODDIE
DOCKET NO.: BI210506S
ORDER AND OPINION DENYING PETITION FOR ADMINISTRATIVE REVIEW
On March 2, 1988, the above-named petitioner-tenant filed a
petition for administrative review (PAR) of an order issued on
January 28, 1988, by the Rent Administrator, concerning the housing
accommodation known as 385 Argyle Road, Apt. #4-H, Brooklyn, N.Y.,
wherein the Administrator determined that the tenant's application
for a decrease in rent should be denied. The order was based upon
the tenant's failure to provide access to the subject apartment for
the purpose of physical inspection by the Division.
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 administrative appeal.
The issue herein is whether the Rent Administrator properly denied
the tenant's application for a decrease in rent.
On September 21, 1987, the tenant filed a complaint alleging that
the owner failed to provide painting and refrigerator services.
The owner filed an answer to the complaint alleging that its
records show no exchange of correspondence with the tenant relative
to the painting of the subject apartment or the refrigerator.
On appeal, the petitioner-tenant asserted, in pertinent part, that
the owner failed to provide reimbursement for her painting of the
subject apartment and for a diminution of refrigerator services
from August 9, 1987 until September 25, 1987. The tenant also
denied that she failed to provide access to the owner's workers.
The petition was served on the owner on May 13, 1988 and on May 31,
1988, the owner filed an answer to the petition stating that the
tenant's claims are false and it stands ready, willing and able to
provide services at all times, where necessary.
After a careful consideration of the entire evidence of record the
Commissioner is of the opinion that the administrative appeal
should be denied.
The record demonstrates that the DHCR inspector failed to gain
access to the subject apartment, on November 30, 1987 and December
30, 1987, despite the tenant having been provided with adequate
Accordingly, the Commissioner finds that there is no basis for a
reduction in rent.
If the facts so warrant, the tenant may seek appropriate reimburse-
ment from the owner in a court of competent jurisdiction.
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
the Administrator's order be, and the same hereby is, affirmed.
JOSEPH A. D'AGOSTA