DF110190RO
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.: DF110190RO
MARTIN J. MAYBLUM
RENT ADMINISTRATOR'S
DOCKET NO.: DB110035OR
PETITIONER
-------------------------------------x
ORDER AND OPINION DENYING PETITION FOR ADMINISTRATIVE REVIEW
The above-named owner filed a timely petition for administrative
review (PAR) of an order issued on June 3, 1989 concerning the
housing accommodations known as 72-10 112th Street, Apt.#3K,
Queens, New York, wherein the Rent Administrator determined the
owner's rent restoration application.
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 petition.
The Rent Administrator's order under AC110667S had reduced the
tenant's rent based on findings that the bathtub drained poorly and
required reglazing, that the bathroom window sashes did not move
and of a hole in one pane, and that the bedroom window permitted
air seepage.
The owner commenced the proceeding under review herein on February
9, 1989, by filing a rent restoration application asserting that
the services for which a rent reduction was issued had been
restored. In support, the owner submitted an invoice for, among
other items, eight new windows for the subject apartment. However,
the owner did not submit receipted bills or other evidence to
establish expenditures. The owner also asserted that repairs
requested by the tenant and made pursuant to a Housing Court
Stipulation of Settlement dated October 6, 1988, signed by the
parties and by their attorneys, did not include the conditions that
had given rise to the rent reduction.
The tenant responded in pertinent part, that the bathtub defects
had not been corrected, and that while new windows were installed,
the bedroom window was not installed properly and was not airtight.
DF110190RO
A DHCR inspection conducted on May 10, 1989 confirmed that the
bathtub conditions had not been addressed and that the bedroom
window permitted air seepage.
The Rent Administrator issued an order denying the owner's rent
restoration application citing the results of the inspection.
The owner also argues that the conditions did not warrant a rent
reduction.
After careful consideration, the Commissioner is of the opinion
that the administrative appeal should be denied.
In rent stabilized accommodations, an owner must complete repairs
in a workmanlike manner and must restore all decreased services
cited in the underlying rent reduction order to secure restoration
of the reduced rent. The record below establishes that the repairs
were not completed in a workmanlike manner during the period of
this rent restoration proceeding. The fact that the Housing Court
Stipulation of Settlement did not include the conditions that were
confirmed by the DHCR inspector does not explain why the conditions
persisted and were confirmed three years after they were cited in
the rent reduction order.
DHCR records also reveal that the Rent Administrator issued an
order on May 10, 1994 under GA110240OR that granted the owner's
subsequent rent restoration application.
THEREFORE, in accordance with the Rent Stabilization Law and Code,
it is
ORDERED, that the owner's petition be and the same hereby is denied
and that the Rent Administrator's order and the same hereby is,
affirmed.
ISSUED:
LULA M. ANDERSON
DEPUTY COMMISSIONER
|
