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.: CK110103RO
Nathan Katz RENT
ORDER AND OPINION DENYING PETITION FOR ADMINISTRATIVE REVIEW
On November 18, 1988 the above named petitioner-owner filed a
timely petition for Administrative Review of an order issued on
August 11, 1988 by the Rent Administrator, concerning the housing
accommodations known as Apt. 1C, 33-51 73 Street, Jackson Heights,
NY, wherein the Rent Administrator granted the owner's rent
restoration application and ordered the rent restored effective
April 1, 1988.
The Commissioner has reviewed the record and carefully considered
that portion relevant to the issues raised by this appeal.
A review of the record reveals that on February 12, 1988,
the owner filed an application to restore rent that had been
reduced in an order issued on June 9, 1987 in Docket No. AK110171S
based on a finding that the windows throughout the apartment were
defective. The owner's application stated that eight new windows
were installed in the subject apartment on September 15, 1987.
The application was served on the tenant on March 28, 1988. The
tenant did not respond.
A physical inspection by DHCR on September 7, 1988 confirmed that
there were no defective windows.
Based on this inspection, the Rent Administrator issued an order
granting the owner's application.
In the petition for administrative review, the owner asserts that
the rent should be restored as of September 15, 1987, the date the
windows were installed, as evidenced by the statement from the
The petition was served on the tenant on January 25, 1989.
After careful consideration of the evidence of record, the
Commissioner is of the opinion that the petition should be denied.
An owner is entitled to restoration of rent once it is established,
pursuant to an application by the owner, that all services for
which the rent was reduced have been restored. The rent
restoration is effective the first of the month following service
of the application on the tenant. just as rent reductions are
effective the first of the month following service of the complaint
on the owner, even if the evidence indicates that there was a
failure to maintain services prior to that date.
In the instant case, although the owner claims that the windows
were installed on September 15, 1987 and even produces supporting
documentation, the restoration application was not filed until
February 12, 1988. It was served on the tenant in March, and in
accordance with the policy stated above, the Rent Administrator
properly ordered the rent restoration to be effective April 1,
Therefore, in accordance with the Rent Stabilization Law and Code,
ORDERED that this petition be and the same hereby is denied and the
Rent Administrator's order be and the same hereby is affirmed.
JOSEPH A. D'AGOSTA