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
APPEAL OF DOCKET NO.: DI110185RO
DOCKET NO.: DC110098OR
ORDER AND OPINION GRANTING PETITION FOR ADMINISTRATIVE REVIEW IN
On September 28, 1989, the above-named petitioner-owner filed a
petition for administrative review (PAR) of an order issued on
September 13, 1989, by the Rent Administrator, concerning the
housing accommodations known as 94-05 222nd Street, Apt.#2J, Queens
Village, New York, wherein the Administrator denied the owner's
application for rent restoration based upon an inspection of the
premises on August 15, 1989 which disclosed that:
1. Intercom system is inoperative.
2. Signs of vermin droppings in kitchen.
3. Toilet bowl is cracked.
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.
The issue herein is whether the Rent Administrator properly
denied the owner's application for rent restoration based upon a
finding that services were not fully restored.
On March 14, 1989, the owner filed an application for rent restora-
tion alleging that all services specified in the rent reduction
order of February 16, 1989, under Docket No. BL110736S, were
The tenant filed an answer to the complaint alleging that the owner
failed to restore all services specified in the rent reduction
On appeal, the petitioner-owner asserted, in pertinent part, that
it is yet to be established whether intercom service is a required
service; that the exterminator reported that there were no signs of
vermin activity; that the tenant usually denies his workers access
to her apartment; that the toilet bowl has a hairline crack above
the waterline on the inside of the bowl which does not impair the
function of the bowl; and that the Rent Administrator failed to
conduct a hearing in the rent reduction proceeding under Docket No.
The petition was served on the tenant on January 26, 1990 and on
February 2, 1990, the tenant filed an answer to the petition
stating that the inspection conducted by the DHCR supports her
contention that the owner failed to fully restore services and that
the DHCR issued an order under Docket No. QCS000151B which found
that an operable intercom system is a required service.
After a careful consideration of the entire evidence of record, the
Commissioner is of the opinion that the administrative appeal
should be granted in part.
The owner, on proof of restoration of those services which were the
subject of the Rent Administrator's rent reduction order is, by
law, entitled to an order of rent restoration.
However, in a PAR against an order denying the owner's application
for rent restoration, an owner cannot challenge the reason for the
original reduction in rent. The owner is required to file a Petit-
ion for Administrative Review (PAR) against the rent reduction
The Commissioner, therefore, finds that with the exception of the
intercom issue, the issues raised in the PAR constitute an
impermissible collateral attack against the rent reduction order of
February 16, 1989.
The issue of the intercom has already been determined in Docket No.
FH120007RK which found that the intercom is not a required service
in any building in the complex. Accordingly the finding of a
defective intercom in this tenant's apartment is revoked.
A DHCR inspection held on August 15, 1989, showed that the owner
failed to restore all of those other services specified in the rent
reduction order of February 16, 1989.
The remaining allegations in the owner's appeal are without merit.
Accordingly, the Commissioner finds that the Administrator properly
based his determination on the entire record, including the results
of the on-site inspection conducted on August 15, 1989, and that
the Rent Administrator properly denied the owner's application to
restore the rent upon determining that the owner had failed to
fully restore services. The Commissioner notes that in accordance
with this opinion, the Rent Administrator's order denying
restoration of rent should be modified to delete any reference to
an inoperative intercom system.
THEREFORE, in accordance with the Rent Stabilization Law and Code,
ORDERED, that this petition be, and the same hereby is, granted in
part, and that the order of the Rent Administrator be, and the same
hereby is, modified in accordance with this order and opinion. The
order and determination of the Rent Administrator is hereby affirm-
ed in all other respects.
LULA M. ANDERSON