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.:
SHARON DE ROSA,
ORDER AND OPINION DENYING PETITION FOR ADMINISTRATIVE REVIEW
On August 23, 1988, the above-named petitioner-tenant filed a
Petition for Administrative Review (PAR) of an order issued on July
25, 1988, by the Rent Administrator, concerning the housing
accommodation known as 1130 Stadium Avenue, Bronx, New York,
Apartment 5-A, wherein the Administrator granted the owner's
application for rent restoration based upon a finding that those
services which were the subject of the Rent Administrator's
reduction order of October 20, 1986, under Docket No. AE630107B,
had been restored.
The Commissioner has reviewed all of the evidence in the record and
has carefully considered that portion of the record relevant to the
issue raised by the administrative appeal.
The issue herein is whether the Rent Administrator properly granted
the owner's application for rent restoration.
On December 31, 1987, the owner filed an application for rent
restoration, alleging that those services which were the subject of
the rent reduction order of October 20, 1986, had been restored.
The tenant filed an answer to the application alleging that the
owner failed to adequately provide such services.
A Division of Housing and Community Renewal (DHCR) inspection
conducted on June 1, 1988, revealed that the owner was adequately
providing such services.
On appeal, the petitioner-tenant asserted, in pertinent part, that
the services remain inadequate.
The petition was served on the owner on October 12, 1988 and on
October 18, 1988, the owner filed an answer to the petition stating
that the subject services are being adequately provided.
After a careful consideration of the entire evidence of record the
Commissioner is of the opinion that the administrative appeal
should be denied.
The owner, on proof of restoration of those services which were the
subject of the Rent Administrator's reduction order is, by law,
entitled to an order of rent restoration.
The record clearly shows that the Rent Administrator in granting
the owner's restoration application, based his findings on the
results of an inspection held by DHCR on June 1, 1988, which
revealed that the owner was maintaining those services specified in
the Administrator's rent reduction order of October 20, 1986.
The Commissioner deems it appropriate to rely on the results of the
Division's inspection and finds that the petitioner failed to
adduce convincing evidence that the inspector's findings were
erroneous in any way.
This order is issued without prejudice to the tenant's continuing
right to file an appropriate application for a rent reduction, if
the facts so warrant.
THEREFORE, in accordance with the provisions of the Rent Stabiliza-
tion 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