DK 430289 RO
                                  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     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
                                  PETITIONER
          ----------------------------------X                                   


                       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
          accommodations. 

          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
          application.

          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
          application.

          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.

          ISSUED:
                                                  ------------------------
                                                  ELLIOT SANDER
                                                  Deputy Commissioner
           
             
                                          
    

TenantNet Home | TenantNet Forum | New York Tenant Information
DHCR Information | DHCR Decisions | Housing Court Decisions | New York Rent Laws
Disclaimer | Privacy Policy | Contact Us

Subscribe to our Mailing List!
Your Email      Full Name