ADM. REVIEW DOCKET NO.: EB630214RO
                                 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.: EB630214RO
           WYNDHAM REALTY CO. C/O
           FINKELSTEIN, BORAH, SCHWARTZ ET AL.    DISTRICT RENT              
                                                  ADMINISTRATOR'S DOCKET
                                                  NO.: DG620407BO
                                                       (BK624544BR)
                                   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 concerning the housing 
          accommodations known as 2145-47 Starling Avenue, various 
          apartments, Bronx, N.Y.

               The Commissioner has reviewed all the evidence in the record 
          and 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, DG620407BO was 
          issued on January 26, 1990.  In that order, the Administrator 
          affirmed the finding of BK624544BR issued June 22, 1989, that the 
          owner be denied eligibility for a 1986/87 Maximum Base Rent (MBR) 
          increase, due to the owner's failure to meet the violation 
          certification requirements necessary to the owner's being granted 
          an MBR increase.

               On appeal, the owner states that the Administrator was in 
          error in finding that the owner hadn't made sufficient repairs to 
          gain it eligibility.  The owner contends that the Administrator 
          disregarded evidence that repairs were being made, as well as 
          refusing to reinspect the subject premises to ascertain that the 
          requisite number of violations had been repaired.  The owner also 
          contends that the Administrator has exceeded the scope of its 
          authority by refusing to accede to owner's request that it 
          reinspect the premises.  The owner cites Section 27-2115(f)(3) of 
          the Housing 















          ADM. REVIEW DOCKET NO.: EB630214RO

          Maintenance Code in support of this contention.  The owner also 
          alleges overreliance by the Administrator on the New York City 
          Department of Housing Preservation and Development (HPD) 
          inspections, contending that an owner's denial of eligibility may 
          result from an individual HPD inspector's error.

               The Commissioner is of the opinion that this petition should 
          be denied.

               When either the Administrator or the Commissioner considers 
          requests for eligibility to increase MBRs (as in the instant case) 
          the New York City Rent and Eviction Regulations are controlling.

               Section 2202.3(h) of the New York City Rent and Eviction 
          Regulations states (in pertinent part):

                    (h) If, at least six months before the effective
                    date of the establishment of new maximum rents...
                    the landlord has not certified...that (1) all rent 
                    impairing violations...and (2) at least 80% of all
                    other violations...have been cleared, corrected or 
                    abated, such new maximum rents or such adjustment
                    shall not take effect...

               The Commissioner is thus of the opinion that any repairs that 
          were ongoing at the time of the Administrator's order denying 
          eligibility, or any repairs that had been made since the effective 
          date are irrelevant to the Administrator's finding below.

               The definition of "rent impairing" and "non rent-impairing" 
          violations are contained in the Housing Maintenance Code.  An HPD 
          inspector is deemed by the Administrator to thus have competence in 
          this determination.  An HPD inspection may be supplemented or 
          replaced by a D.H.C.R. inspection, if so necessary.  Moreover, the 
          D.H.C.R.'s reliance on HPD inspections in order to determine an 
          owner's eligibility for an MBR increase has been upheld by the 
          courts.

               The Commissioner notes that the D.H.C.R. does not have 
          jurisdiction over the Division of Code Enforcement or of any part 
          of the HPD, which is an agency of the City of New York.

               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 






          ADM. REVIEW DOCKET NO.: EB630214RO

          Administrator 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