STATE OF NEW YORK
                            OFFICE OF RENT ADMINISTRATION
                                     GERTZ PLAZA
                               92-31 UNION HALL STREET
                                  JAMAICA, NY 11433

          APPEAL OF                                    DOCKET NO.: CI410095RT

                    Elliott D. Vizansky,
                                                       RENT ADMINISTRATOR'S
                                                       DOCKET NO.: CA410001OR


          On September 8, 1988, the above-named petitioner-tenant filed a 
          petition for administrative review of an order issued on August 23, 
          1988, by the Rent Administrator, concerning the housing 
          accommodation known as 33 Riverside Drive, Apt. 7A, New York, N.Y., 
          wherein the Administrator determined that the conditions giving 
          rise to a rent reduction order issued on January 30, 1987, had been 
          repaired and directed a restoration of rent.

          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.

          This proceeding was commenced by the filing by the owner of an 
          application to restore rent dated January 4, 1988.  Thereafter, an 
          inspection by a DHCR staff inspector, determined that services had 
          been restored, resulting in the Administrator's order herein 
          appealed restoring the rent.

          In the PAR, the tenant contends that, contrary to the recital in 
          the order, no inspection of his apartment took place on July 20, 
          1988; that the February 1, 1988 effective date is arbitrary in that 
          repairs were not made until June as confirmed by the results of 
          various agency inspections; and, that the leaks in the apartment 
          were never completely repaired.

          After careful consideration, the Commissioner is of the opinion 
          that the petition should be granted in part.

          The record indicates that three inspections of the subject 
          apartment took place on March 24, 1988, April 26, 1988, and June 


          22, 1988.  The first two inspections indicate that the required 
          repairs had not been made.  It was not until the inspection of June 
          22, 1988 that the conditions in the tenant's apartment were found 
          to have been corrected.  It was therefore error for the 
          Administrator to restore the rent effective February 1, 1988 when 
          the Division's own records indicate that the repairs were made at 
          a much later date.  Accordingly, the Administrator's order is 
          modified to change the effective date to July 1, 1988, the first 
          rent payment date following the repairs to the apartment.

          While the order indicates that an inspection of the subject 
          apartment took place on July 20, 1988, the evidence of record does 
          not support this and the petitioner concedes that no inspection 
          took place on that date.  Nevertheless, this is immaterial in that 
          an earlier inspection, as discussed above, confirmed the 
          restoration of services.

          Lastly, while the tenant claims that, contrary to the 
          Administrator's order, the leaks in his apartment were never 
          completely repaired, the tenant has submitted no evidence of this 
          fact.  The Commissioner notes that a stipulation of settlement of 
          a non-payment proceeding, which was brought by the owner against 
          the tenant, dated May 26, 1988 required the tenant to produce an 
          independent plumber to show what conditions the tenant was claiming 
          had not been repaired.  There is no evidence in the file to 
          indicate whether the plumber was produced and whether the 
          conditions claimed by tenant in that proceeding were ever 
          established.  Notwithstanding this, it was proper for the 
          Administrator to rely on the inspection results to determine the 
          outcome in this case.  Photographs of the affected area taken one 
          year after the order herein appealed are not dispositive of the 
          conditions in the apartment at the time of inspection on June 28, 

          THEREFORE, in accordance with the Rent Stabilization Law and Code 
          and the Emergency Tenant Protection Act of 1974, it is

          ORDERED, that this petition be, and the same hereby is, granted in 
          part, and that the Rent Administrator's order be, and the same 
          hereby is, modified in accordance with this order and opinion.


                                             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