ADM. REVIEW DOCKET NO.: EE230230RO
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.: EE230230RO
DISTRICT RENT
ADMINISTRATOR'S DOCKET
M.P. MANAGEMENT CO. NO.: CH220046BT
C/O KUCKER, KRAUS & BRUH (7M03376K)
PETITIONER
------------------------------------X
ORDER AND OPINION DENYING PETITION
The above-named owner filed a timely petition for
administrative review of an order issued concerning the housing
accommodations known as 7201 Bay Parkway, various apartments,
Brooklyn, 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, CH220046BT was
issued on January 12, 1990. In that order, the Administrator
revoked the finding of 7M03376K, issued June 29, 1988, that the
owner be granted 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. CH220046BT was an order issued upon the filing of
a Challenge to the grant of eligibility, by one of the affected
tenants at the subject premises.
On appeal, the owner alleges that the Administrator erred by
not serving it with a copy of the tenant's Challenge. The owner
alleges that as a result of this error it cannot "..determine what
evidence the owner relied upon in rendering its determination."
The owner further requests access to the record of the instant
proceeding.
ADM. REVIEW DOCKET NO.: EE230230RO
The Commissioner is of the opinion that this petition should
be denied.
An examination of the file reveals that a List of Pending
Violations (LPV) enumerates 40 non rent-impairing violations of
record against the subject premises as of January 1, 1985. In
order to receive eligibility to raise MBRs at the subject premises
for 1986/87, the owner was thus obligated to certify to the
clearance of at least 32 (40 X 80% = 32) of those violations.
An inspection of the subject premises conducted by the New
York City Department of Housing Preservation and Development (HPD)
on January 17, 1989 disclosed that, even as of that late date (over
one year after the conclusion of the 1986/87 cycle) the owner had
still failed to clear the requisite number of violations from the
subject premises.
The Administrator does not have a duty to serve the owner with
a copy of the tenant's Challenge to an order granting the owner
eligibility to raise MBRs at a given premises for a given cycle.
Such service is not included in standard DHCR procedure, nor is it
prescribed by statute. Moreover, the Commissioner is of the
opinion that, inasmuch as the owner has the right to appeal before
the Commissioner any order issued by the Administrator upon the
tenant's filing of a Challenge, such lack of service in no way
prejudices the owner's due process rights.
The Commissioner notes that if the owner wishes to examine the
record in the instant proceeding it is free to file with this
Agency a FOIL (Freedom of Information Law) request.
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
Administrator be, and the same hereby is, affirmed.
ISSUED:
JOSEPH A. D'AGOSTA
Deputy Commissioner
|
