STATE OF NEW YORK
                            OFFICE OF RENT ADMINISTRATION
                                     GERTZ PLAZA
                               92-31 UNION HALL STREET
                               JAMAICA, NEW YORK 11433

          ------------------------------------X  SJR#6779
          APPEAL OF                              DOCKET NO.:              
                                                 RENT ADMINISTRATOR'S 
                                                 DOCKET NO.:
              PROVIDENT OPERATING CORP.          


                              PETITIONER      : 


               On October 30, 1990, the above-named petitioner-owner filed a 
          petition for administrative review of an order issued on September 
          25, 1990, by the Rent Administrator, concerning the housing 
          accommodation known as 64-34 99th Street, Rego Park, N.Y., 
          Apartment 4-E, wherein the Administrator determined that the 
          owner's application for a restoration of rent which was filed on 
          December 6, 1989 should be denied based on a finding that the 
          tenant purchased the replacement refrigerator and that consequently 
          the owner has not been relieved of its obligation to provide same.

               Subsequent thereto, the petitioner filed a petition in the 
          Supreme Court pursuant to Article 78 of the Civil Practice Law and 
          Rules requesting that the Court direct the Division to 
          expeditiously issue a determination of the petitioner's 
          administrative appeal.

               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.  

          ADM. REVIEW DOCKET NO.: EJ110289RO

               The issue herein is whether the denial of the owner's 
          application for rent restoration is proper.

               On appeal, the petitioner-owner asserted, in essence, that a 
          new refrigerator was installed in the subject apartment on October 
          5, 1987; that the cost of the refrigerator was shared by it and the 
          tenant; that the parties agreed that the owner would not apply for 
          a monthly rent increase for the installation of the refrigerator 
          and that, therefore, it is entitled to the rent restoration because 
          there was no longer a defective refrigerator in the 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 owner applied for rent 
          restoration in January, 1986, under Docket Number AA100035OR and 
          that the Rent Administrator denied the application on January 23, 
          1987 based on a finding that the refrigerator is defective.  The
          Rent Administrator's order reducing the rent of the subject 
          apartment, based upon the owner's failure to repair the 
          refrigerator was issued on December 7, 1982.  Therefore, almost 
          five years had elapsed since the Rent Administrator issued the 
          order reducing the maximum rent of the subject apartment to the 
          time the owner originally applied for a restoration of rent.  The 
          second application for a restoration of rent was filed by the owner 
          on October 30, 1990, under Docket Number DL110015OR, nearly eight 
          years after the Rent Administrator reduced the rent of the subject
          apartment and this application was denied by the Rent Administrator 
          on September 25, 1990. 

               The record in this proceeding reveals that the tenant has 
          consistently alleged that he paid for the new refrigerator in full 
          without reimbursement from the owner and that although the owner 
          actually purchased the refrigerator, the tenant reimbursed the 
          owner in cash for the purchase.

               A copy of the tenant's reply was mailed to the owner on June 
          15, 1990 and August 1, 1990 with the specific request that the 
          owner submit paid invoices to buttress the owner's claim that it 
          paid for the refrigerator.  

               The Commissioner finds that the owner failed to reply to 
          either request and did not submit any evidence whatsoever in 
          support of its contention that it paid for the refrigerator.

          ADM. REVIEW DOCKET NO.: EJ110289RO

               The tenant, however, submitted documents from the Whirlpool 
          Corporation which indicate that the purchase was made in the 
          tenant's name.

               Accordingly, the Commissioner finds that the Rent 
          Administrator acted correctly in denying the owner's second 
          application for a restoration of rent.  

               THEREFORE, in accordance with the provisions of the Rent and 
          Eviction Regulations for New York City, it is

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

               In the event the owner reimburses the tenant for the cost of 
          the refrigerator, it may separately reapply for a rent restoration. 


                                          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