CI110110RO
                                  STATE OF NEW YORK
                      DIVISION OF HOUSING AND COMMUNITY RENEWAL
                            OFFICE OF RENT ADMINISTRATION
                                     GERTZ PLAZA
                               92-31 UNION HALL STREET
                               JAMAICA, NEW YORK 11433




          ----------------------------------x
          IN THE MATTER OF THE ADMINISTRATIVE          ADMINISTRATIVE REVIEW
          APPEAL OF                                    DOCKET NO.:
                                                       CI110110RO
                  MOHAMMAD A. MALIK        
             C/O  MAPLE REALTY INC.,                   RENT ADMINISTRATOR'S
                                                       DOCKET NO.:
                                   PETITIONER          CB110010OR 
          ----------------------------------x     


            ORDER AND OPINION DENYING PETITION FOR ADMINISTRATIVE REVIEW


          On September 15, 1988, the above-named petitioner-owner filed a 
          Petition for Administrative Review (PAR) of an order issued on 
          August 11, 1988, by the Rent Administrator, concerning the housing 
          accommodations known as 134-38 Maple Avenue, Flushing, New York, 
          Apartment 3-D, wherein the Administrator determined that the 
          owner's application to restore the rent should be denied based upon 
          the owner's failure to restore services as shown by the results of 
          an inspection held on June 24, 1988.

          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 denied  
          the application to restore the rent of the subject apartment.

          On January 30, 1988, the owner filed an application to restore the 
          rent alleging that the services which were the subject of the rent 
          reduction order, dated July 28, 1986, under Docket No. Q003836S, 
          were restored.

          The application was mailed to the tenant on March 10, 1988.

          A DHCR inspection conducted on June 24, 1988, revealed that:

               1.   Bathroom has peeling paint and plaster due to 
                    water seepage;

               2.   Evidence of vermin infestation in the kitchen, 
                    bathroom and hallways; and












          CI110110RO




               3.   Water-stains are observed on the living room, 
                    bedroom and dining room ceilings and walls.

          On appeal, the petitioner-owner asserted, in pertinent part, that 
          the tenant has repeatedly refused access to her apartment to its 
          workers for the purpose of making repairs.

          The tenant filed an answer to the petition stating that the owner 
          failed to make any of the repairs.

          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 below shows that the owner's application for rent 
          restoration unequivocally stated that the repairs which were the 
          subject of the rent reduction order of July 28, 1986, were com-  
          pletely performed, not that access could not be obtained.

          This contradicts the owner's subsequent assertion that the tenant 
          was unreasonably refusing access to its workers to make repairs.

          Based upon the evidence in the record, the Commissioner finds that 
          the Rent Administrator properly denied the owner's application for 
          rent restoration.

          Upon a restoration of services the owner may reapply for a rent 
          restoration.


          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.
           

          ISSUED:


                                                                                                                         
                                                       JOSEPH A. D'AGOSTA
                                                       Deputy Commissioner

    

TenantNet Home | TenantNet Forum | New York Tenant Information
DHCR Information | DHCR Decisions | Housing Court Decisions | New York Rent Laws
Disclaimer | Privacy Policy | Contact Us

Subscribe to our Mailing List!
Your Email      Full Name