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

          APPEAL OF                               DOCKET NO. EC520470RT

                                                  DISTRICT RENT
                                                  ADMINISTRATOR'S DOCKET
                                                  NO. DG420014BT 
            TOM ETTINGER,


               On March 26, 1990 the above-mentioned tenant filed a petition 
          for administrative review of an order issued on February 23, 1990 
          by the Rent Administrator concerning the housing accommodation 
          known as Apartment 11G, 420 Riverside Drive, New York, New York.

               The Commissioner has reviewed all of the evidence in the 
          record and has carefully considered that portion of the record 
          relevant to the issues raised by the petition for review.

               The issue in this proceeding is whether the Administrator's 
          order granting the landlord maximum base rent (MBR) increases for 
          the 1988-1989 period was proper.

               On May 19, 1989 the Administrator issued an order, under 
          Docket No. BL524050BR, determining that the subject landlord was 
          eligible for MBR increases for the 1988-1989 period, effective 
          January 1, 1988.

               On June 2, 1989 the subject tenant filed a challenge of the 
          above-mentioned order.

               In the order under review herein, the Administrator affirmed 
          the order issued under Docket No. BL524050BR, which granted the 
          landlord MBR increases for the 1988-1989 period.

          ADM. REVIEW DOCKET NO. EC520470RT

               In his petition the subject tenant asserts, among other 
          things, that the landlord has not removed the requisite number of 
          violations pending against the subject building to be eligible for 
          MBR increases for the 1988-1989 period; that there still exists a 
          rent-impairing violation pending against the subject building, and 
          that there has been a reduction of services in the subject 

               After careful consideration, the Commissioner is of the 
          opinion that the subject tenant's petition should be denied.

               The Commissioner notes that the Administrator's order under 
          review herein was based upon a finding that the subject landlord 
          had met the prescribed violation certification requirements, and 
          other applicable requirements to be eligible for MBR increases for 
          the 1988-1989 period effective as of January 1, 1988.

               The record reflects that the subject landlord did in fact 
          remove the requisite number of violations to be eligible for the 
          MBR increases for the 1988-1989 period.

               As the subject landlord has met the requirements for MBR 
          increases for the aforementioned biennial cycle, pursuant to the 
          applicable provisions of the City Rent and Eviction Regulations, 
          the Commissioner finds that the Administrator's order under review 
          herein should not be disturbed.

               The Commissioner further finds that the subject tenant does 
          not substantiate his allegation that the landlord is not 
          maintaining essential services as would warrant revocation of the 
          adjustments in the maximum base rents.  However, the Commissioner 
          notes that this order is issued without prejudice to the right of 
          any tenant to file an application with the rent agency for a rent 
          reduction based on the landlord's failure to maintain services if 
          the facts so warrant.

               Accordingly, the Commissioner finds that the tenant's petition 
          should be denied.

               THEREFORE, in accordance with the City Rent and Rehabilitation 
          Law and the Rent and Eviction Regulations, it is

               ORDERED, that the tenant's petition be, and the same hereby 
          is, denied, and that the order of the Rent Administrator be, and 

          ADM. REVIEW DOCKET NO. EC520470RT

          the same hereby is, affirmed.


                                              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