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
APPEALS OF DOCKET NOS.: DE520041RT
LOVIE HAMILTON LEE/MARY B. HOLMES DOCKET NO.: DA530095OR
ORDER AND OPINION DENYING PETITIONS FOR ADMINISTRATIVE REVIEW
The above-named tenants filed timely petitions for
administrative review of an order issued concerning the housing
accommodations known as 720 Riverside Drive, Apts. 5L and 7B, New
The Commissioner has consolidated the above referenced
petitions as they contain identical issues of law and fact.
The Commissioner has reviewed all the evidence in the record
and has carefully considered that portion of the record relevant to
the issues raised by the petitions.
The owner commenced this proceeding by filing an application
to restore rents for the remaining $2.00 rent reduction. The owner
asserted that it restored and was maintaining certain services in
the subject building for which a $5.00 rent reduction had been
ordered on November 10, 1987 (BA530041B). The owner applied for
and received a partial rent restoration of $3.00 which had been
ordered on August 25, 1988 (BL520029OR).
One tenant interposed an answer, asserted that all repairs had
Thereafter, an inspection of the subject apartment was
conducted by a DHCR inspector who confirmed that services had been
The Rent Administrator found a restoration of these services
and further ordered, a $2.00 restoration of the legal regulated
In their petitions for administrative review, the tenants
state, in substance, that they have not taken the rent reduction,
and that there was a repair and not an improvement to the building.
The DHCR served a copy of the petition on the owner on June
After careful consideration, the Commissioner is of the
opinion that these petitions should be denied.
The tenants' petitions appealing the rent restoration order do
not dispute that repairs were performed. Thus, their petitions
fail to establish any basis to disturb the Administrator's order
which determined that the owner restored services based on an
inspection by the Agency. The tenants were entitled to a rent
reduction when the order reducing rent was issued, but were not
required to take it. The rent restoration order appealed just
restores the balance of the rent reduction, it is not a rent
increase for an improvement.
THEREFORE, in accordance with the Rent and Eviction
Regulations for New York City, it is
ORDERED, that these petitions and the same hereby are, denied,
and that the Rent Administrator's order be, and the same hereby is,
Joseph A. D'Agosta