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.:EK420220RO
Parkoff Management, RENT ADMINISTRATOR'S
641 West 207 Street
New York, NY
ORDER AND OPINION DENYING PETITION FOR ADMINISTRATIVE REVIEW
The above-named owner filed a timely petition for administrative
review of an order issued on October 15, 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 parties do not dispute the record indicating the status of the
tenant as rent-stabilized.
The owner commenced this proceeding on March 20, 1990 by filing an
application to restore rent based on a submitted copy of a February
20, 1990 work order wherein the tenant signed an acknowldegement of
work completed to his satisfaction. The tenant's acknowledgement was
served on the tenant for response.
In an answer filed on May 2, 1990, the tenant stated that "work was
not done in workmanlike fashion; cracks, peeling and water stains
recurred immediately; repairs were not adequate."
On August 20, 1990, an inspection of the subject apartment was
conducted by a DHCR staff member who confirmed that there was
peeling paint around the kitchen wall cabinets; and that the
bathroom ceiling was peeling paint, cracked, water-stained and about
By an order dated October 15, 1990, the Administrator denied the
In this petition, the owner contends in substance that all work was
done as indicated by the February 20, 1990 work order signed by the
tenant; and that the tenant allegedly withdrew the complaint on
April 17, 1990. The owner asserts that some problems may have
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.
Under the circumstances of this rent restoration proceeding, the
owner submitted a tenant's signed statement that services were
completed. The tenant was served a copy of this signed
acknowledegement; and the tenant answered that "work was not done in
workmanlike fashion; cracks, peeling and water stains recurred
immediately; repairs were not adequate." The tenant's answer was
verified by DHCR inspection. The Administrator's service of the
tenant's acknowledgement was not abuse of discretion.
The owner's petition does not establish any basis to modify or
revoke the Administrator's determination that the owner failed to
repair in a workmanlike manner, based on the August 20, 1990
inspection which confirmed the continued existence of defective
conditions, warranting a denial of the owner's application.
The status of the owner's rent restoration applications is as
follows: ED520120OR denied on February 4, 1991 and GG520118OR
granted on December 24, 1993.
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