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.: DD120215RO
RICHARD ALBERT RENT
ORDER AND OPINION DENYING PETITIONS FOR ADMINISTRATIVE REVIEW
On April 21, 1989 the above named petitioner-owner filed Petitions
for Administrative Review against an order of the Rent
Administrator issued April 14, 1989 concerning the housing
accommodations known as Apt. 5H, 94-05 222nd Street, Queens
Village, NY, wherein the Administrator denied the owner's rent
restoration application based on a finding that services had not
The owner's petitions were erroneously assigned two docket numbers
which are consolidated for disposition herein.
The Commissioner has reviewed all the evidence of record and has
carefully considered that portion relevant to the issues raised on
The record reveals that the owner filed a rent restoration
application on November 17, 1988 in which he asserted that all
conditions for which the rent was reduced in Docket No. BL130069B
were repaired as of the date of the rent reduction order. The rent
had been reduced for a cracked south side walkway.
In answer to the application, the tenant asserted that the walkway
had not been repaired in a workmanlike manner.
A physical inspection by DHCR on March 31, 1989 confirmed that the
walkway had been patched but the patches were cracked.
Based on this inspection report, the owner's application was
In the petition for administrative review, the owner asserts that
no rent reduction was justified because the owner corrected the
item involved as part of routine maintenance. The owner also
contends that the finding of unworkmanlike repairs establishes that
the sidewalk was repaired and argues that the repairs were done in
a manner consistent with neighborhood standards but the DHCR used
a ridiculously strict standard.
The petition was served on the tenant on August 21, 1989. In
response, the tenant continued to oppose the owner's application on
the ground that repairs were not done in a complete and workmanlike
fter careful consideration of the evidence of record, the
Commissioner is of the opinion that the petition should be denied.
The Administrator's order was properly based on the results of a
physical inspection which revealed that the walkway had not been
repaired in a workmanlike manner. The owner's petition does not
establish any basis for modifying or revoking this order. In fact,
the petition primarily challenges the validity of the rent
reduction which is not is not subject to attack in this proceeding
and which was upheld in the owner's petition for review of that
order (Docket No. CG110008RO).
The Division's records reveal that the owner's rent restoration
application was granted in Docket No. DD130117OR.
Therefore, in accordance with the Rent Stabilization Law and Code
and the Rent and Eviction Regulations for New York City, it is
ORDERED that this petition be and the same hereby is denied and the
Rent Administrator's order be and the same hereby is affirmed.
JOSEPH A. D'AGOSTA