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

          APPEAL OF                               DOCKET NO.:             
                  ALBERT A. CORIOU,                     
                                                  RENT ADMINISTRATOR'S
                                                  DOCKET NO.:
          ----------------------------------x     BJ120861S 


          On October 4, 1988, the above-named petitioner-tenant filed a 
          petition for administrative review (PAR) of an order issued on 
          September 28, 1988, by the Rent Administrator, concerning the 
          housing accommodation known as 94-26 34th Road, Apartment E-7, 
          Jackson Heights, New York, wherein the Administrator denied the 
          tenant's application for a rent reduction for reduction in services 
          on the basis that the tenant failed to provide access to the 
          apartment for the purpose of inspection.

          The Commissioner has reviewed all 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 of a complaint by the 
          tenant alleging numerous conditions of non-maintenance of apartment 

          The owner was served with a copy of the tenant's complaint and 
          advised that the tenant does not cooperate with the owner to make 
          repairs, and that the tenant does not answer the door bell or 
          accept certified mail requesting access for repairs.  Included with 
          the owner's answer were copies of various certified mailings from 
          the owner to the tenant which had been returned unclaimed, and 
          statements of owner's agents who were denied access.

          On May 2, 1988, the Division notified the tenant of the owner's 
          claim of lack of access and asked him to set a mutually agreed upon 
          date for access.  By letter dated May 5, 1988, the tenant responded 
          that the owner or his agents have been granted access on five 


          occasions most recently on May 3, 1988, but made little effort to 
          cure the conditions.  The tenant went on to complain about the 
          superintendent, overcrowding and stereophonic noise in the 
          apartment above, and lack of extermination.

          On June 29, 1988, the tenant was notified of an inspection of his 
          apartment to take place on July 20, 1988.  On July 5, 1988, the 
          tenant notified the Division that he would not be available until 
          August 8, 1988.  The inspector was unable to accommodate the 
          request but suggested July 22, as an alternative date.  This was 
          not acceptable to the tenant who requested that the inspector not 
          come on either date.

          On August 22, 1988, the tenant was again notified of an inspection 
          to take place on August 30, 1988, at which time repairs would take 
          place.  The notice stated that a failure by the tenant to keep this 
          appointment will result in a determination based solely on the 
          evidence presently of record.  On the day of inspection, there was 
          no answer at the apartment resulting in the order denying the 
          tenant's complaint.

          In the PAR, the tenant states that on July 5, 1988, he requested of 
          the inspector an alternate date of August 4, 1988, but was informed 
          by the inspector that the proceeding could not be extended beyond 
          July 22.  The tenant further states that he was not available 
          between August 22 and August 30, 1988.

          After careful consideration the Commissioner is of the opinion that 
          the petition should be denied.

          Two notices were sent from this Division to arrange for an 
          inspection of this tenant's apartment.  Given the amount of lead 
          time attending the first notice of inspection which was dated June 
          29, 1988, and without further ostensible reason on the part of the 
          tenant, it is difficult to understand that a mutually convenient 
          date could not be arrived at during the month of July.  The 
          Division sought to arrange a "no-access" inspection at the end of 
          August on notice to both tenant and owner.  The tenant does not 
          allege that he did not receive the notice but, again, states his 
          unavailability between the date of the notice and the date of 
          inspection.  Notwithstanding that the tenant states he was advised 
          that the inspection could not take place after July 22 because the 


          proceeding could not be protracted, and again, without further 
          explanation on the part of the tenant, the Commissioner finds, 
          given the record in this case, that ample opportunity was given to 
          this tenant to make his apartment available for inspection and the 
          Administrator's order was correct as issued.

          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, denied, and 
          that the Rent Administrator's order be, and the same hereby is, 


                                                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