STATE OF NEW YORK
                            OFFICE OF RENT ADMINISTRATION
                                     GERTZ PLAZA
                               92-31 UNION HALL STREET
                               JAMAICA, NEW YORK 11433

          APPEAL OF                              DOCKET NO.              
                                                 FC - 410327 - RT
                                                 RENT ADMINISTRATOR'S
                                                 DOCKET NOS.    
                                                 EF - 410188 - OR            
                                                 (DA - 410086 - OR)
                                                 (BJ - 410026 - B)
                   SARAH HELEWITZ                 

                              PETITIONER      : 


               On March 19, 1991, the above-named petitioner-tenant timely 
          re-filed an Administrative Appeal against an order issued on 
          February 20, 1991, by the Rent Administrator, 92-31 Union Hall 
          Street, Jamaica, New York, concerning the housing accommodations 
          known as 340 East 66th Street, New York, N.Y.

               The issue herein is whether the Rent Administrator properly 
          ordered restoration of the rents, effective August, 1990. 

               The Commissioner has reviewed all of the evidence in the 
          record and has carefully considered that portion of the record 
          relevant to the issue raised by the administrative appeal.  

               The Rent Administrator's order, appealed herein, granted the 
          owner's rent restoration application in whole, restoring the rents 
          of all apartments for which the rents had been reduced in Docket 
          No. BJ 410026 B effective August 1, 1990, for rent stabilized 
          tenants and March 1, 1991 for rent controlled tenants.  The order 
          was based upon the evidence in the file including an inspection 
          held on October 31, 1990, which showed that the following services 
          were maintained:

          ADM. APPEAL DOCKET NO. FC - 410327 - RT  

                    1. All current tenants names are listed on the
                       bell and buzzer system.
                    2. Ivy plants have been removed from exterior  
                       windows and bricks.
                    3. All public areas including basement are clean.
                    4. New thermal windows have been installed  
                       throughout the public hallways.
                    5. There is no evidence of any broken mailbox doors.
                    6. Rear-yard and side of the building are clean.
                    7. Public areas and lobby walls and ceilings have
                       been painted.

               The petitioner-tenant asserts, in essence, that the Rent 
          Administrator erred by restoring the rents, effective August, 1990, 
          when another unannounced inspection by the Enforcement Bureau on 
          October 2, 1990 revealed 13 uncorrected conditions.  The petitioner 
          further states that the Rent Administrator did not address the 
          issue of the removal of the porter which has been the very heart of 
          the tenants' complaint from the beginning. 

               After a careful consideration of the entire evidence of record 
          the Commissioner is of the opinion that the administrative appeal 
          should be granted in part.

               An application for a restoration of rent which is determined 
          to have merit generally results in a rent restoration that becomes 
          effective for rent stabilized tenants on the first rent payment 
          date following service of the owner's application on the tenant.  
          In the instant case, the DHCR served the application on the tenants 
          on July 24, 1990 and the rent restoration was therefore effective 
          August 1, 1990 for petitioner's apartment.   

               The rent restoration ordered by the Rent Administrator herein 
          was warranted by the findings of the inspection report referred to 
          above (October 31, 1990), which was an unannounced visit to the 

               The Commissioner has considered the petitioner-tenant's claim 
          about the owner's omission of porter-services and finds it to be 
          without merit.  The rent reduction order for which the owner was 
          seeking restoration stated among the conditions to be corrected:  
          "Public areas throughout subject premises is dirty including the 
          basement."  Accordingly, the issue in the restoration proceeding is 
          whether the public areas are clean, not whether the position of 
          porter has been eliminated.   

               Although the inspector who made an unannounced visit to the 
          premises on October 31, 1990 found the public areas clean and well- 

          ADM. APPEAL DOCKET NO. FC - 410327 - RT  

          kept, the Commissioner is of the opinion that the October 2, 1990 
          inspection by the Enforcement Bureau which revealed dirty public 
          halls and stairways adequately established that as of that date 
          conditions were not entirely corrected.  Accordingly, the rent 
          restoration for the petitioner should be modified to be effective 
          November 1, 1990, the first of the month following the inspection 
          that revealed all services restored. 

               The Commissioner notes that since no other tenants joined in 
          the petition and the petitioner did not act in a representative 
          capacity, this modification on the effective date applies to the 
          petitioner only. 

               As for the removal of the porter, if the services performed by 
          this person are not being provided, the proper procedure is to 
          raise this issue in the application for a reduction of rent and/or 
          a Petition for Administrative Review against the underlying rent 
          reduction order, which the tenant did not file.  The tenant can not 
          properly raise this issue in the subject proceeding which was 
          initiated by the owner in order to obtain a restoration of rent, 
          based on the restoration of services as listed in the rent 
          reduction order.

               THEREFORE, in accordance with the provisions of the Rent 
          Stabilization Law and Code, it is

               ORDERED, that this petition be, and the same hereby is, 
          granted in part, and the Administrator's order be, and the same 
          hereby is, modified to order restoration of the rent for Apartment 
          3G only to be effective November 1, 1990.


                                          JOSEPH A. D'AGOSTA
                                          Acting 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