ADM. REVIEW DOCKET NO.:  EH-420088-RO



                                  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.:              
                                                 EH - 420088 - RO            
                                      
                                              :  
                                                 
                                                 RENT ADMINISTRATOR'S    
                                                 DOCKET NO.:                 
                                                 DL - 420028 - OR
                  WEST BANK REALTY CO.                           
                                                  

                              PETITIONER      : 
          ------------------------------------X                             

            ORDER AND OPINION DENYING PETITION FOR ADMINISTRATIVE REVIEW


               On August 7, 1990, the above-named petitioner-owner filed a 
          petition for administrative review against an order issued on July 
          27, 1990, by the Rent Administrator, concerning the housing 
          accommodation known as 82 West 105th Street, New York, N.Y., 
          Apartment 3 - N, wherein the Administrator denied the owner's 
          application for rent restoration, based upon an inspection of the 
          premises, on July 3, 1990, which disclosed that the living room 
          floor was repaired in an unworkmanlike manner in that a section of 
          wood flooring was placed on top of a defective floor.

               The Commissioner has reviewed all of the evidence in the 
          record and has carefully considered that portion of the record 
          relevant to the issue 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 service was not fully restored. 

               On appeal, the petitioner-owner asserted, in effect, that the 
          inspector erred in finding that the living-room floor was repaired 
          in an unworkmanlike manner.  The owner submitted photographs 
          purportedly of the newly installed floor in the tenant's apartment.  















          ADM. REVIEW DOCKET NO.:  EH-420088-RO

               On September 5, 1990, the tenant filed an answer to the 
          owner's petition alleging, in essence, that the living-room floor 
          repair was made in an unworkmanlike manner.  She also denied that 
          the photographs were of her apartment. 

               After a careful consideration of the entire evidence of record 
          the Commissioner is of the opinion that the administrative appeal 
          should be denied. 

               The Commissioner notes that the Rent Administrator denied two 
          prior owner applications for rent restoration, on April 17, 1989 
          and October 19, 1989, and two subsequent applications, on April 5, 
          1991, and April 1, 1992.

               The subject application for rent restoration was filed by the 
          owner, alleging that the living room floor had been repaired in a 
          workmanlike manner and the dining room closet walls and ceiling had 
          been repaired.  These were the only two conditions cited in an 
          October 19, 1988 order that had not been restored in the prior 
          proceedings.

               In answer to the application , the tenant asserted that the 
          floor was repaired in an unworkmanlike manner, particularly in the 
          area around the radiator. 

               The physical inspection confirmed that the floor was not 
          installed properly near the radiator.

               The owner's petition does not establish that restoration of 
          the rent is warranted.  The inspection substantiated the tenant's 
          statement that the floor repair was not done properly.  The tenant 
          disputes that the photographs reflect her apartment and the owner's 
          statement in reply to the tenant's answer that the tenant broke the 
          floor on purpose in order to pay a reduced rent is preposterous.

               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 July 3, 1990, 
          and that the Director properly denied the owner's application to 
          restore the rent upon determining that the owner had failed to 
          fully restore services.  

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

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


          Upon a restoration of services the owner may separately apply for 
          a rent restoration.






          ADM. REVIEW DOCKET NO.:  EH-420088-RO


          ISSUED:


                                                                        
                                          JOSEPH A. D'AGOSTA
                                          Acting 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