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.:
SANDRA C. DEVITA,
ORDER AND OPINION DENYING PETITION FOR ADMINISTRATIVE REVIEW
On September 6, 1988, the above-named petitioner-tenant filed a
petition for administrative review (PAR) of an order issued on July
28, 1988, by the Rent Administrator, concerning the housing
accommodations known as 152-24 Jewel Avenue, Flushing, New York,
various apartments, wherein the Administrator denied the owner's
application for a restoration of rent because evidence in the file
indicated that no rent reduction was warranted under Docket No.
ZQS000548B. The latter order was issued on March 4, 1986.
The Commissioner has reviewed all 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 issued
the appealed order.
On December 21, 1987, the owner filed an application for rent
restoration alleging that it had complied with the directive to
restore services issued on March 4, 1986, under Docket ZQS000548B.
The application did not seek any rent adjustment.
The tenants filed an answer to the application alleging, in
substance, that the tenants were entitled to a rent reduction but
had not received one.
A Division of Housing and Community Renewal (DHCR) inspection
conducted on December 3, 1987, revealed that the owner fully
complied with all DHCR directives.
On appeal, the petitioner-tenants asserted, in pertinent part, that
if no rent adjustment was warranted, as the Rent Administrator's
order states, then the owner would not have filed an application
for rent restoration.
The petition was served on the owner on October 17, 1988.
After careful consideration of the entire evidence of record, the
Commissioner is of the opinion that the administrative appeal
should be denied.
The record clearly shows that, on March 4, 1986, the Rent
Administrator determined that no rent reduction was warranted.
The Commissioner finds, therefore, that the Rent Administrator
properly determined that no rent adjustment was warranted in the
Accordingly, the Rent Administrator's order is consistent with the
evidence in the record and the Administrator properly issued the
The tenant's petition is actually a challenge to the order issued
on March 4, 1986, in Docket No. QS0000548B but is not timely as to
THEREFORE, in accordance with the provisions of the Rent Stabili-
zation Law and Code, it is
ORDERED, that this petition be, and the same hereby is, denied, and
that the Rent Administrator's order be, and the same hereby, is
JOSEPH A. D'AGOSTA