ADM. REVIEW DOCKET NO. DL630210RO


                                 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.: DL630210RO

                                                  DISTRICT RENT
                                                  ADMINISTRATOR'S DOCKET
                                                  NO.: DE620040BO
            VIRGINIA REALTY CO.                        (7MD04128BX)
                                   PETITIONER
          ------------------------------------X

            ORDER AND OPINION DENYING PETITION FOR ADMINISTRATIVE REVIEW

               The above-named owner filed a timely petition for 
          administrative review of an order issued concerning the housing 
          accommodations known as 2550 University Avenue, Apts. 13N and 32N, 
          Bronx, NY.

               The Commissioner has reviewed all the evidence in the record 
          and has carefully considered that portion of the record relevant to 
          the issues raised by the petition.

               The issue before the Commissioner is whether the 
          Administrator's order was correct.

               The Administrator's order being appealed, DE620040BO, was 
          issued on November 17, 1989.  In that order, the Administrator 
          affirmed the finding of 7MD04128BX, issued May 12, 1989, that the 
          owner be denied eligibility for a 1986/87 Maximum Base Rent (MBR) 
          increase, due to the owner's failure to timely file with the 
          Administrator an Affidavit of Service (Affidavit).  

               The timely submission of this Affidavit would have the effect 
          of certifying that the owner had timely served upon the affected 
          tenants an Order of Eligibility (Order) to increase MBRs at the 
          subject premises for 1986/87.

               The Order was mailed by the Administrator to the owner on June 
          29, 1988, under the docket number 7MD04128BX.  The owner was 
          explicitly notified on the face of the Order (Part II(b)) that the 
          submission of the Affidavit to the Administrator was expected 
          within 60 days of the mailing date of the Order (i.e. by August 29, 














          ADM. REVIEW DOCKET NO. DL630210RO



          1988).  On February 1, 1989 the Administrator sent the owner a 
          notice that, as the owner had not yet submitted the Affidavit, it 
          must do so within 20 days or else risk the Administrator's denying 
          it eligibility to raise MBRs at the subject premises for 1986/87.

               On appeal the owner purports to prove that it timely served 
          the affected tenants with the Order of Eligibility.  As alleged 
          proof of this contention, the owner submits on appeal a copy of a 
          U.S. Postal form apparently used as an application for certified or 
          registered mail.  This form contains the owner's name and address 
          (as "sender") and the affected tenants' names and addresses (as 
          "addressee").  The form is stamped "August 29, 1988" with an 
          official Post Office date stamp.

               The Commissioner is of the opinion that this petition should 
          be denied.

               An examination of the postal form submitted by the owner on 
          review, as alleged proof of timely service of the order upon the 
          tenants reveals the following:

               Except for the above-mentioned owner's and tenants' names and 
          addresses and the Postal date stamp, as well as a DHCR date stamp 
          bearing the date "December 21,1989" (the date of the filing of the 
          instant appeal) and a private postage meter dated "August 29, 1988" 
          the form is blank.  In an area labeled "postage", the owner has 
          written the tenants' Apartment ##.  Otherwise, areas on the form 
          which request the amount of postage being paid, the number of 
          pieces being mailed, various other charges etc., as well as the 
          area requesting a Postal employee's signature are blank.

               The Commissioner is thus of the opinion that, with the sole 
          exception of the Postal stamp, the Postal form is not persuasive as 
          to the owner's contention on appeal, namely that the tenants were 
          timely served with the Order by the owner.  The fact that the form 
          is otherwise incomplete indicates that it was never reviewed by 
          Postal personnel.

               THEREFORE, in accordance with the provisions of the Rent and 
          Eviction Regulations, it is
















          ADM. REVIEW DOCKET NO. DL630210RO

               ORDERED, that this petition for administrative review be, and 
          the same hereby is denied and that the order of the Rent 
          Administrator be, and the same hereby is, affirmed.

          ISSUED:




                                                                            
                                             JOSEPH A. D'AGOSTA
                                             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