Docket No. DK220226RT
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.: DK220226RT
DISTRICT RENT
Joyce Dunston ADMINISTRATOR'S DOCKET
NO.: DA220023BT(BK220840BR)
PETITIONER
------------------------------------X
ORDER AND OPINION DENYING PETITION FOR ADMINISTRATIVE REVIEW
The above-named tenant filed a timely petition for
administrative review of an order issued concerning the housing
accommodations known as 2106 Fulton Street, Apartment 2, Brooklyn,
New York.
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 issue before the Commissioner is whether the
Administrator's order was correct.
A tenant residing at the subject premises filed with the
Administrator a Challenge to the order granting the owner
eligibility to raise Maximum Base Rents (MBRs) at the subject
premises for the 1988/1989 cycle, said order issued on September
30, 1988 under the Docket #BK220840BR. Based on the tenant's
Challenge, the Administrator issued the order under review herein
on October 13, 1989, under Docket #DA220023BT, in which order the
Administrator affirmed the owner's eligibility. In that order the
Administrator determined that the owner had certified to the timely
clearance of a sufficient number of violations from the subject
premises.
The Commissioner additionally advised the tenant to file a
complaint of decreased service(s), if conditions warranted.
On appeal, the tenant reiterates her allegations originally
made at Challenge below.
The Commissioner is of the opinion that this petition should be
Docket No. DK220226RT
denied.
An examination of the record discloses that the owner of the
subject premises cleared enough violations from those premises so
as to be eligible for MBR increases at those premises for 1988/89.
The Commissioner is thus of the opinion that the Administrator was
correct in granting the owner eligibility upon the tenant's
Challenge.
The fact that violations remain outstanding at a premises does
not necessarily bar the owner of those premises from eligibility to
raise MBRs. So long as the owner has cleared 100% of the rent-
impairing violations (as is the case here) and 80% of the non rent-
impairing violations (as is also the case here) from the subject
premises, and none of the remaining violations constitute a denial
of an essential service (as is the case here), the owner is
eligible for MBR increases at the subject premises.
This order is issued without prejudice to the tenant's right to
file with the Administrator a Complaint of Reductions in
Service(s), if the circumstances so warrant.
THEREFORE, in accordance with the provisions of the Rent and
Eviction Regulations, it is
ORDERED, that this petition for administrative review be, and
the same hereby is, denied, and that the order of the Rent
Administrator be, and the same hereby is, affirmed.
ISSUED:
Joseph A. D'Agosta
Deputy Commissioner
|
