Docket No. EA220340RO
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.: EA220340RO
Eliyahu Niasoff DISTRICT RENT
Agent for Sara Moskowitz ADMINISTRATOR'S DOCKET
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 1371 43rd Street, Apartment 1R, Brooklyn,
The Commissioner has reviewed all the evidence in the record an
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, DJ220028BO was issued
on December 22, 1989. In that order, the Administrator affirmed
the finding of 7M01498K, issued October 3, 1989, that the owner be
denied eligibility for a 1986/87 Maximum Base Rent (MBR) increase,
due to the owner's failure to make a timely payment of the MBR Fee.
On appeal, the owner states that payment was made and there is
evidence to prove as much; however, the agent is presently out of
town. Upon his return, the owner will submit documentary proof of
her claim that the payment was made.
The Commissioner is of the opinion that this proceeding should
The Commissioner notes that, subsequent to the issue of
7M01498K in October 1989 the owner submitted a check for $20 (the
proper amount) to the D.H.C.R. in payment of the MBR Fee, and that
Docket No. EA220340RO
this check was returned to the owner by the Administrator. The
Administrator noted this receipt and nonacceptance in DJ220028BO.
The Commissioner notes, however, that both of the Administrator's
orders were based on the finding that the Administrator had
requested payment of the MBR Fee on April 28, 1989, and had never
received payment at that time. The Commissioner is thus of the
opinion that the "payment" that the agent will eventually "prove"
upon his return to work is the payment made to and refused by the
Administrator in October 1989. As noted, the fact that the owner
attempted to make payment 6 months after it was requested by the
Administrator is not in doubt.
The Commissioner is therefore of the opinion that the owner has
failed to prove on appeal that she made timely payment of the MBR
Fee, and that the Administrator was correct in thus denying to
owner eligibility for a 1986/87 MBR increase.
THEREFORE, in accordance with the provisions of the Rent and
Eviction Regulations, it is
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.
Joseph A. D'Agosta