ADM. REVIEW DOCKET NO.: EE230353RO
                                 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.: EE230353RO
            ATTELMAR REALTY CORP.
            by SANTA MARLETTA                     DISTRICT RENT
                                                  ADMINISTRATOR'S DOCKET
                                                  NO.: DI220031BO
                                                       (BL224366BR)
                                   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 2540 Ocean Avenue, various apartments, 
          Brooklyn, NY.

               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, DI220031BO was 
          issued on April 20, 1990.  In that order, the Administrator 
          affirmed the finding of BL224366BR issued June 22, 1989, that the 
          owner be denied eligibility for a 1988/89 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 contends that various violations have 
          been repaired.  The owner also presents documentation (including 
          copies of cancelled checks and bills from repairmen) as proof of 
          his contentions.

               On a more procedural basis, the owner contends that the "MBR 
          unit changed its processing procedures for the 1988/89 MBR cycle 
          without" notifying owners of these changes or of "the documentation 
          needed to qualify for an MBR."  The owner also contends that the 
          Administrator never notified him that the information he submitted 
          was insufficient, despite his request.














          ADM. REVIEW DOCKET NO.: EE230353RO

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

               Despite the owner's contentions on appeal, an inspection 
          conducted by the New York City Department of Housing Preservation 
          and Development on September 15, 1989 disclosed that the requisite 
          number of violations had not been repaired.  The Commissioner is 
          thus of the opinion that the Administrator was correct in finding 
          that the owner had not made sufficient repairs to the subject 
          premises and in subsequently denying the owner's eligibility to 
          increase MBRs for 1988/89.

               The Commissioner is additionally of the opinion that the 
          filing requirements for owners did not change substantively for the 
          1988/89 cycle.  The Commissioner notes that the only change in 
          procedure in 1988/89 was a change in the due date of the MBR Fee.  
          No additional documentation was required from the owners.

               In an MBR proceeding, upon receipt of the owner's "package" 
          (consisting of the Violation Certification and the Operation and 
          Maintenance Expense Certification) the Administrator determines the 
          owner's eligibility for an MBR increase, and notifies the owner of 
          that decision in an order of eligibility.  The Administrator does 
          not respond to owners' inquires as per the sufficiency of their 
          submission on an individual basis.

               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






           
    

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