DE110274RO
                                  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.: DE110274RO 
                                                              
          RICHARD ALBERT                          RENT
                                                  ADMINISTRATOR'S DOCKET 
                                                  NO.: DB110059OR
                                 PETITIONER             
          ----------------------------------x

            ORDER AND OPINION DENYING PETITION FOR ADMINISTRATIVE REVIEW
                                          
               On May 25, 1989 the above named petitioner-owner filed a 
          Petition for Administrative Review against an order of the Rent 
          Administrator issued on May 4, 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 
          April 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  February 17, 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. BL110739S had been issued.  The 
          Commissioner notes that the rent was ordered reduced based on 
          findings of a defective intercom and bell and buzzer system, 
          evidence of vermin infestation in the apartment, apartment walls 
          and ceilings in need of scraping and peeling paint and plaster and 
          defective bedroom window screens. The Commissioner further notes 
          that the condition of the intercom and bell and buzzer system are 
          no longer active issues in this proceeding.  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 restored 
          services.  

               The Administrator issued the order being appealed on May 4, 
          1989 and granted the owner's application effective April 1, 1989.













          DE110274RO

               On appeal the owner states, in sum, that the effective date 
          for rent restoration should have been June 1, 1988, the effective 
          date of the rent reduction, and not April 1, 1989.  The owner 
          argues that the effective date should be changed because the rent 
          reduction was not justified.  The petition was served on the tenant 
          on September 11, 1989. 

               The tenant filed a response on October 3, 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 March, 1989.  The 
          Administrator correctly ordered rent restoration effective April 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 PAR is wholly 
          an impermissible collateral attack against 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 and such appeal was assigned 
          Docket No. DA110210RO. Said appeal is being determined separately, 
          but issued herewith.

               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