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.: DH110334RO
SJR NO.: 7077
Mohammed A. Malik c/o
Karen Schwartz-Sidrane,
RENT ADMINISTRATOR'S
DOCKET NO.: DD110342S
SUBJECT PREMISES:
Apt.1D
47-40 41st. St.
Sunnyside, NY
PETITIONER
-----------------------------------X
ORDER AND OPINION DENYING PETITION FOR ADMINISTRATIVE REVIEW
The above-named owner filed a timely petition for administrative
review of an order issued on July 25, 1989 concerning the housing
accommodations relating to the above-described docket number.
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 petition.
The tenant commenced this proceeding on April 17, 1989 by filing a
complaint asserting that the owner had failed to maintain certain
services in the subject apartment.
On April 27, 1989, DHCR mailed a copy of the complaint to the owner.
The Commissioner notes that though duly notified to do so, the owner
failed to respond to the complaint or to inform the Administrator of
a court proceeding regarding the same matter. There is nothing in
the record to indicate that the owner submitted some form of
explanation or rebuttal to the Administrator.
Thereafter, an inspection of the subject apartment was conducted on
July 7, 1989 by a DHCR staff member who confirmed the existence of
a defective oven/broiler.
On July 25, 1989, the Administrator directed the restoration of
services and ordered a reduction of the stabilized rent based on the
inspection result that the oven/broiler failed to electronically
ignite as required , making the oven and broiler inoperative.
In the petition for administrative review, the owner contends in
substance that in a court stipulation dated September 25, 1989, the
tenant discontinued this proceeding (DD110342S); and thus, the
Administrator's order has no binding effect.
DH110334RO
On December 14, 1989, DHCR mailed a copy of the petition to the
tenant who asserted that she never signed the alleged housing court
stipulation, that this stipulation is a mere copy and that there is
no original, and that repairs were effected on August 7, 1989 i.e.
subsequent to the issuance of the order appealed from.
After careful consideration, the Commissioner is of the opinion that
the petition should be denied.
The Administrator's determination was based on the entire record,
including the results of the July 7, 1989 inspection by a DHCR staff
member who confirmed the existence of a defective oven/broiler.
These are decreased services, warranting a rent reduction. The
determination was in all respects proper and is hereby sustained.
The Commissioner notes that the tenant admits that repairs were
effected on August 7, 1989 i.e. subsequent to the issuance of the
order appealed from. The owner does not appear to dispute this
admission. Accordingly, based on the restoration of the services in
question, the Commissioner restores the stabilized rent effective
August 7, 1989.
The owner's submission in the petition of a copy of a court
stipulation fails to rebut the Administrator's determination which
is based on the inspection results. The Commissioner notes that
though duly notified to do so, the owner failed to respond to the
complaint or to inform the Administrator of a court proceeding
regarding the same matter. There is nothing in the record to
indicate that the owner submitted some form of explanation or
rebuttal to the Administrator.
THEREFORE, in accordance with the Rent Stabilization Law and Code,
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,
affirmed.
ISSUED:
JOSEPH A. D'AGOSTA
Deputy Commissioner
|
