STATE OF NEW YORK
DIVISION OF HOUSING AND COMMUNITY RENEWAL
OFFICE OF RENT ADMINISTRATION
92-31 UNION HALL STREET
JAMAICA, NEW YORK 11433
IN THE MATTER OF THE ADMINISTRATIVE ADMINISTRATIVE REVIEW
APPEAL OF DOCKET NO.:EI110266RO
Vig Associates, RENT ADMINISTRATOR'S
43-31 Ithaca Street
ORDER AND OPINION DENYING PETITION FOR ADMINISTRATIVE REVIEW
The above-named owner filed a timely petition for administrative
review of an order issued on August 23, 1990 concerning the housing
accommodations relating to the above-described docket number.
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 tenant commenced this proceeding on September 19, 1989 by filing
a complaint asserting that the owner had failed to maintain certain
services in the subject apartment.
In answer, the owner denied the allegations and otherwise asserted
that all repairs were done.
On July 26, 1990, an inspection of the subject apartment was
conducted by a DHCR staff member who confirmed the existence of
By an order dated August 23, 1990, the Administrator directed the
restoration of services and ordered a rent reduction.
In this petition, the owner contends in substance that all work was
done; that the delay in the repairs was caused by the tenant going
DHCR mailed a copy of the petition to the tenant.
After careful consideration, the Commissioner is of the opinion that
the petition should be denied.
Pursuant to Section 2523.4 of the Rent Stabilization Code, DHCR is
authorized to order a rent reduction, upon application by a tenant,
where it is found that an owner has failed to maintain required
services. The owner's petition does not establish any basis to
modify or revoke the Administrator's determination based on the July
26, 1990 inspection which confirmed the existence of defective
conditions, warranting a rent reduction.
The contention that the tenant's going on vacation delayed the
repairs is unsubstantiated. Moreoever, this contention was not
raised in the proceeding below prior to the issuance of the
Administrator's order and is now raised for the first time on
appeal. Accordingly, the same is beyond the scope of administrative
review which is limited to the issues and evidence before the
The Commissioner notes that the owner's rent restoration application
(FK110051OR) was granted on June 21, 1993.
The automatic stay of the retroactive rent reduction that resulted
by the filing of this petition is vacated upon issuance of this
Order and Opinion.
THEREFORE, in accordance with the Rent Stabilization Law and Code
and Operational Bulletin 84-1, it is
ORDERED, that this petition be, and the same hereby is, denied, and
that the Administrator's order be, and the same hereby is, affirmed.
JOSEPH A. D'AGOSTA