STATE OF NEW YORK
DIVISION OF HOUSING AND COMMUNITY RENEWAL
OFFICE OF RENT ADMINISTRATION
92-31 UNION HALL STREET
JAMAICA, NY 11433
IN THE MATTER OF THE ADMINISTRATIVE ADMINISTRATIVE REVIEW
APPEAL OF DOCKET NO.:
ORDER AND OPINION DENYING PETITION FOR ADMINISTRATIVE REVIEW
On April 24, 1990, the above-named petitioner-tenant filed a
petition for administrative review (PAR) of an order issued on
April 10, 1990, by the Rent Administrator, concerning the housing
accommodation known as 99-05 63rd Drive, Rego Park, New York,
Apt. 11-W, wherein the Administrator granted the owner's
application for rent restoration based upon a finding that the
tenant failed to keep scheduled appointments with the DHCR
The Commissioner has reviewed all of the evidence in the record and
has carefully considered that portion of the record relevant to the
issue of the administrative appeal.
The issue herein is whether the Rent Administrator properly granted
the owner's application for rent restoration.
On August 25, 1989, the owner filed an application for rent
restoration, alleging that all services which were the subject of
the rent reduction order of April 29, 1988 had been restored.
The tenant filed an answer to the application alleging that
contrary to the owner's statement in the application, the repairs
were not made.
On appeal, the petitioner-tenant asserted, in pertinent part, that
she failed to keep an appointment with the DHCR inspector because
of a family emergency and that the owner failed to fully restore
The petition was served on the owner on June 18, 1990 and on July
15, 1990, the owner filed an answer to the petition stating that
the repairs were made in a workmanlike manner.
After a careful consideration of the entire evidence of record the
Commissioner is of the opinion that the administrative appeal
should be denied.
The owner, on proof of restoration of those services which were the
subject of the Rent Administrator's reduction order is, by law,
entitled to an order of rent restoration.
The file reveals that inspection notices were sent to the tenant
which respectively scheduled separate appointments for March 14,
1990 and March 16, 1990, but that the tenant failed to keep either
appointment. Although the tenant claims that a personal emergency
occurred on the day of the inspection, there were in fact two
scheduled inspections and the tenant offers no explanation for her
failure to admit the inspector on the second date or to notify the
Division in a timely manner of the personal emergency.
The record clearly shows that the Rent Administrator in granting
the owner's restoration application, predicated the determination
on the tenant's failure to keep the scheduled appointments with the
Accordingly, the Commissioner finds that the Rent Administrator did
not did not err by granting the owner's application.
This order is issued without prejudice to the tenant's continuing
right to file an appropriate application for a rent reduction, if
the facts so warrant.
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.
JOSEPH A. D'AGOSTA