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.: EI130189RT
DOCKET NO.: DL110112OR
Mark H. Simon,
ORDER AND OPINION DENYING PETITION FOR ADMINISTRATIVE REVIEW
On September 28, 1990, the above-named petitioner-tenant filed
a petition for administrative review (PAR) of an order issued on
August 29, 1990, by the Rent Administrator, concerning the housing
accommodations known as 99-05 63 Drive, Rego Park, NY, wherein the
Administrator determined that the conditions which gave rise to the
rent reduction had not been fully corrected.
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 proceeding was commenced by the filing of a rent
restoration application on November 23, 1989. On July 27, 1990 an
inspection was conducted by a Division employee which confirmed
that some of the conditions, which were the basis of the rent
reduction, had not been corrected. Accordingly, the order denying
the owner's application was issued on August 29, 1990.
In the PAR, the tenant requests that the Administrator's order
be modified on the basis that the order incorrectly concludes that
certain conditions have been corrected, and that the order should
include additional conditions which were not found by the
Administrator in the order reducing the rent.
The Commissioner is of the opinion that the petition should be
In order for a rent restoration application to be granted, it
must be established that the conditions cited in the rent reduction
order have been corrected. In this case, the rent reduction order
described the several services not being maintained. The only
relevant inquiry is whether those conditions were corrected and the
services restored. The report of inspection conducted on July 27,
1990 by an employee of the Division, who is not a party to the
proceeding, was properly placed in the record for consideration by
the Administrator. The Commissioner finds that it was proper for
the Administrator to rely on the inspection results in determining
which conditions were corrected.
The tenant's contention of additional defective conditions,
which were not contained in the Administrator's order, is more
properly the subject of a challenge to the rent reduction order.
Inasmuch as the time period for challenging that order has passed,
the tenant is entitled to no relief regarding those issues as they
are untimely raised herein. Furthermore, an administrative appeal
is strictly limited to issues of law and fact raised in the
proceeding below and accordingly, the tenant's allegation regarding
the conditions outside of Apt. 7-O, as to which no evidence had
been presented below, cannot be considered in this appeal.
THEREFORE, in accordance with the Rent Stabilization Law and
Code, it is,
ORDERED, that this petition be, and the same hereby is, denied
and the Rent Administrator's order be, and the same hereby is,
Joseph A. D'Agosta