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.:
                                                  EC220017RO
                                                                           
          Sunshine Realty Co.,                    RENT ADMINISTRATOR'S
                                                  DOCKET NO.:
                                                  DD220071OR 

                                                  PREMISES: Apt.3B
                                                  2301 Ocean Ave.
                                                  Brooklyn, NY
                              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 on January 30, 1990 concerning the 
          housing accommodations relating to the above-described docket 
          number.

          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 in this petition. 

          The owner commenced the proceeding below on April 11, 1989 by 
          filing an application to restore rent based on the tenant's 
          unreasonable refusal to permit the owner to restore services. The 
          owner requested that a Notice of Inspection (For Access) be served 
          on the tenant. The owner asserted that the leak in the apartment 
          above was repaired, that only priming and painting needs to be done 
          in the tenant's apartment.

          In an answer filed on May 26, 1989, the tenant denied the 
          allegation in the application and otherwise asserted that the owner 
          failed to do repairs when requested by the tenant, that the owner 
          filed various rent restoration applications when in fact the 
          conditions were not corrected.

          On October 4, 1989, a physical inspection of the subject apartment 
          was conducted by a DHCR staff member who reported that the tenant, 
          the managing agents and repairmen were present; that repairs were 
          in progress; that the bathroom walls and ceiling were damaged by a 












          EC220017RO

          leak, the plaster cracked and peeling; and that there appeared to 
          be mildew in the area.

          By a letter filed on October 10, 1989, the tenant informed the Rent 
          Administrator that repair was done improperly and in an 
          unworkmanlike manner; that upon notice, the managing agents refused 
          to correct the conditions; and that a reinspection is necessary.

          Thereafter, a physical inspection of the subject apartment was 
          conducted on January 4, 1990 by a DHCR staff member who confirmed 
          that the bathroom wall area around the window frame had mildew; the 
          top of the window plaster was peeling from the wall area; and the 
          side of the medicine chest was not fully covered with paint.

          By an order dated January 30, 1990, the Administrator denied the 
          owner's application.

          In the petition for administrative review, the owner contends in 
          substance that the tenant harassed the painter who attempted to 
          complete the work after the October 4, 1989 inspection for access.

          In answer, the tenant asserted that the owner failed to appear on 
          the scheduled dates, the conditions were not repaired, and the 
          defective conditions as shown by attached copies of photos are 
          actually worse than the Administrator's finding.

          After careful consideration, the Commissioner is of the opinion 
          that the petition should be denied.

          The petition does not establish any basis for modifying or revoking 
          the Administrator's determination based on the physical inspections 
          which confirmed the continued existence of defective conditions, 
          warranting the denial of the owner's application. The claim that 
          the tenant harassed the painter and unreasonably refused access was 
          unsubstantiated and without merit. Accordingly, the order appealed 
          from was in all respects proper and is hereby sustained.

          THEREFORE, in accordance with the Rent Stabilization Law and Code,  
          it is ,

          ORDERED, that this petition be, and the same hereby is, denied, and 
          that the Administrator's order 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