ADM. REVIEW DOCKET NO.: EL430106RO

                                 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.: EL430106RO
           ALEXANDER BRETT, INC.
           c/o ROSENBERG & ESTIS, P.C.            DISTRICT RENT
                                                  ADMINISTRATOR'S DOCKET
                                                  NO.: DG420486BO
                                                       (BL422857BR)
                                   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 350 East 77th Street, various apartments, 
          New York, 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, DG420486BO was 
          issued on November 2, 1990.  In that order, the Administrator 
          affirmed the finding of BL422857BR 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 granting 
          an MBR increase.

               On appeal the owner contends that it has filed the Violation 
          Certification (VC) and Certification of Operation and Maintenance 
          expense (O & M) with the Administrator.  The owner concludes that 
          the Administrator is therefore incorrect in finding that the owner 
          did not file the VC.

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
















          ADM. REVIEW DOCKET NO.: EL430106RO

               The Administrator's order under review herein reads (in 
          pertinent part):  "The landlord has failed to file the violation 
          certification necessary to qualify for current MBR increases."

               The Commissioner notes that the above language does not 
          necessarily refer to the owner's submission in merely quantitative 
          terms.  The Administrator will not be satisfied with the submission 
          of a VC which "certifies," that repairs have been made when in fact 
          they haven't.  To be judged complete, an owner's submission of the 
          VC must certify that 80% of the non rent impairing violations have 
          actually been repaired.

               In the instant proceeding, an inspection of the subject 
          premises conducted by the New York City Division of Housing 
          Preservation and Development (HPD) on September 5 and 18, 1990 
          reveals that the owner had not repaired 80% of the non rent 
          impairing violations of record as of one year before the effective 
          date of the order of eligibility (i.e. as of January 1, 1987.)

               The Commissioner is thus of the opinion that the owner's 
          physical submission of the VC is not at issue in this proceeding, 
          and that the Administrator was correct in finding that, as the 
          owner had failed to repair 80% of the non rent impairing violations 
          at the subject premises it had thus failed to file the VC 
          "necessary to qualify for current MBR increases."

               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