DE110195RO
                                  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.: DE110195RO 
                                                              
          RICHARD ALBERT                          RENT
                                                  ADMINISTRATOR'S DOCKET 
                                                  NO.: DA110100OR
                                 PETITIONER             
          ----------------------------------x

            ORDER AND OPINION DENYING PETITION FOR ADMINISTRATIVE REVIEW
                                          
               On May 23, 1989 the above named petitioner-owner filed a 
          Petition for Administrative Review against an order of the Rent 
          Administrator issued on May 3, 1989. The order concerned housing 
          accommodations known as Apt 2B located at 93-41 222nd Street, 
          Queens Village, N.Y.  The Administrator granted the owner's rent 
          restoration application and ordered the rent restored effective 
          March 1, 1989.  

               The Commissioner has reviewed the record and carefully 
          considered that portion relevant to the issues raised by this 
          appeal.

               This proceeding was commenced on January 4, 1989 by the filing 
          of a rent restoration application wherein the owner alleged, in 
          sum, that it had restored services for which a rent reduction order 
          bearing Docket No. QS004078S had been issued.  The Commissioner 
          notes that, in proceedings bearing Docket Nos. BK110102OR and 
          CE110066OR, the Administrator had found that all services ordered 
          restored in Docket No. QS004078S had been restored except for the 
          space between the bathroom door frame and wall. The tenant was 
          served with a copy of the application and afforded an opportunity 
          to respond. 

               The Administrator ordered a physical inspection of the subject 
          apartment.  The inspection was conducted on April 18, 1989 and 
          confirmed the owner's allegation to the effect that it had 
          corrected the problem regarding the space between the bathroom door 
          frame and the wall.  The Administrator issued the order being 
          appealed on May 3, 1989 and granted the owner's application 
          effective March 1, 1989.

               On appeal the owner states, in sum, that the effective date 
          for rent restoration should have been February 1, 1986 and not  
          March 1, 1989.  The owner argues that the effective date should be 












          DE110195RO

          changed based on the tenant's alleged denial of access to the 
          subject apartment as well as the fact that the rent reduction was 
          not justified.  The petition was served on the tenant on           
          September 9, 1989. 

               The tenant filed a response on September 23, 1989 and stated, 
          in sum, that the order being appealed was correctly issued and 
          should be affirmed.

               After careful review of the evidence in the record, the 
          Commissioner is of the opinion that the petition should be denied.

               The Commissioner notes that the effective date of rent 
          restoration for a rent stabilized tenant is the first rent payment 
          date following service of the owner's application on the tenant.  
          The application was served on the tenant in February, 1989.  The 
          Administrator correctly ordered rent restoration effective March 1, 
          1989, the first rent payment date following service of the 
          complaint.  The order being appealed is affirmed.

               The Commissioner further notes that the owner's administrative 
          appeal is wholly an impermissible collateral attack on the 
          underlying rent reduction order.  The owner's proper recourse was 
          to timely file an administrative appeal against the rent reduction 
          order.  A review of the Division's records discloses that the owner 
          did file an appeal against the rent reduction order.  That appeal 
          was assigned Docket No. CE110203RO and was denied on May 26, 1994.

               THEREFORE, pursuant to 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:



                                                                             
                                             LULA M. ANDERSON  
                                             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