CH210132RO
STATE OF NEW YORK
DIVISION OF HOUSING AND COMMUNITY RENEWAL
OFFICE OF RENT ADMINISTRATION
GERTZ PLAZA
92-31 UNION HALL STREET
JAMAICA, NY 11433
------------------------------------x
IN THE MATTER OF THE ADMINISTRATIVE ADMINISTRATIVE REVIEW
APPEAL OF DOCKET NO.: CH210132RO
Cornell Leasing Corp.,
RENT ADMINISTRATOR'S
DOCKET NO.: CA210186OR
PETITIONER
------------------------------------x
ORDER AND OPINION DENYING PETITION FOR ADMINISTRATIVE REVIEW
On August 18, 1988, the above-named petitioner-owner filed a
petition for administrative review (PAR) of an order issued on
August 1, 1988, by the Rent Administrator, concerning the housing
accommodation known as 665 New York Avenue, Brooklyn, New York,
Apt. 6-N, wherein the Administrator determined that the owner
should be granted restoration of the rent based on a finding that
the tenant denied access to her apartment. The rent was restored
effective April 1, 1988.
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
restored the rent of the subject apartment, effective April 1,
1988.
The owner commenced this proceeding by filing an Application for
Rent Restoration on January 7, 1988, stating that services for
which a rent reduction order had been issued by the Administrator
on November 24, 1986, under Docket No. AB210838S had been restored.
Two DHCR inspections were scheduled for June 15, 1988 and June 23,
1988, but the tenant failed to keep either appointment.
On appeal, the petitioner-owner asserted, in pertinent part, that
the Rent Administrator erred in that the effective date of the rent
CH210132RO
restoration order should have been February 1, 1988, rather than
April 1, 1988.
The petition was served on the tenant on October 6, 1988.
After a careful consideration of the entire evidence of record the
Commissioner is of the opinion that the administrative appeal
should be denied.
With regard to the issue of the effective date of rent restoration
ordered by the Administrator, the Commissioner notes that it is the
policy of the DHCR to order rent restoration for rent stabilized
tenants effective the first rent payment date following service of
the application on the tenants.
A review of the record shows clearly that the application for rent
restoration was served on the tenant on March 14, 1988.
The Commissioner finds, therefore, that the Rent Administrator's
determination that the rent should be restored, effective April 1,
1988, was correct and proper.
Accordingly, the order here under review is affirmed.
THEREFORE, pursuant to the Rent Stabilization 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,
affirmed.
ISSUED:
JOSEPH A. D'AGOSTA
Deputy Commissioner
|
