DK 430289 RO
STATE OF NEW YORK
DIVISION OF HOUSING AND COMMUNITY RENEWAL
OFFICE OF RENT ADMINISTRATION
92-31 UNION HALL STREET
JAMAICA, NEW YORK 11433
----------------------------------X S.J.R. NO. 5778
IN THE MATTER OF THE ADMINISTRATIVE ADMINISTRATIVE REVIEW
APPEAL OF DOCKET NO.: DK 430289 RO
TABNIK REALTY CORPORATION,
DISTRICT RENT ORDER
DOCKET NO.: BJ 430129 OM
ORDER AND OPINION REMANDING PROCEEDING
On November 29, 1989 the above-named petitioner filed a Petition
for Administrative Review against an order issued on November 8,
1989 by a Rent Administrator, concerning housing accommodations
known as 148 West 67th Street, New York, New York, various
Subsequent thereto the petitioner-owner filed a petition in the
Supreme Court pursuant to Article 78 of the Civil Practice Law
andRules requesting that the Court direct the Division to
expeditiously determine the petitioner's administrative appeal.
The proceeding was subsequently remitted to the Division by Court
order for a determination of the administrative appeal.
The Commissioner has reviewed all of the evidence in the record
and has carefully considered that portion of the record relevant
to the issues raised by the administrative appeal.
This proceeding was commenced by the owner filing an application
for Major Capital Improvement (MCI) rent increases for the
subject accommodations based on the installation of a new oil
burner and new heating controls at the subject premises. The
owner submitted documentary evidence showing that it made
expenditures totalling $8,745.00 for said installation.
On October 10, 1989, the owner was directed to submit additional
information/evidence within twenty (20) days and advised that his
failure to do so might result in an order dismissing its
On October 27, 1989 the owner requested a twenty (20) day
extension in order to respond to the request for information.
On October 30, 1989 the Rent Administrator notified the owner
that its extension request was being denied. The owner was also
informed in said notice that it was required to submit
information/evidence within twenty (20) days of October 30, 1989.
DK 430289 RO
On November 8, 1989, the Rent Administrator issued the order
appealed herein denying the owner's application for MCI rent
increases based on the owner's failure to respond and submit
information/evidence required for the processing of the
In this petition, the owner contends, among other things, that it
submitted the requested information/evidence to the Division of
Housing and Community Renewal (DHCR) within twenty (20) days of
the October 30, 1989 notice and therefore, the Rent
Administrator's order should be reversed. The owner submits with
the petition a copy of said information/evidence, which is date
stamped as received by the DHCR on November 17, 1989.
The Commissioner is of the opinion, in light of the possibility
of any confusion which may have occurred on the owner's part as a
result of the conflicting information it received in the October
30, 1989 notice, that this proceeding should be remanded to the
Rent Administrator for further processing of the owner's MCI
application. On remand, the Rent Administrator should consider
the claims made and/or evidence submitted on appeal and should
request any other evidence deemed necessary.
THEREFORE, in accordance with the Rent and Eviction Regulations
and the Rent Stabilization Code, it is
ORDERED, that this petition be, and the same hereby is, granted
to the extent of remanding this proceeding to the Rent
Administrator for further processing in accordance with this
Order and Opinion.