Docket Number: FD-210004-RO
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.: FD 210004-RO
: DISTRICT RENT ADMINISTRATOR'S
MANUEL PASTOR, DRO DOCKET NO.: EI 210626-S
ORDER AND OPINION DENYING PETITION FOR ADMINISTRATIVE REVIEW
On April 1, 1991, the above-named owner filed a timely Petition for
Administrative Review of an order issued on February 20, 1991,
concerning t e 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.
On September 20, 1990, the tenant commenced this proceeding by
filing a complaint asserting that the owner had failed to maintain
certain services in the subject apartment.
In its answer filed on October 18, 1990, the owner asserted that
"all the problems...were taken care of except the fumigation which
the tenant requested not be done at that time."
In reply filed on December 29, 1990, the tenant denied that repairs
Thereafter on January 24, 1991, an inspection of the subject
apartment was conducted by a D.H.C.R. inspector who confirmed the
existence of defective conditions.
On February 20, 1991, the Rent Administrator directed restoration of
these services and further ordered a reduction of the stabilization
In its petition for administrative review, the owner states, in
substance, that all repairs have been performed and that the
defective conditions were caused by the tenant in retaliation for
After careful consideration, the Commissioner is of the opinion that
the petition should be denied.
Docket Number: FD-210004-RO
First, the owner provided no proof in this petition that the tenant
caused the defective conditions. The owner also did not raise this
issue of tenant-caused defects in the proceeding below and should
be precluded from raising same on appeal.
Second, although the owner contends that repairs were effectuated
prior to the issuance of the Administrator's order, the Commissioner
notes that the owner submitted insufficient evidence to substantiate
the contention either while the proceeding was pending before the
Administrator or by attachment to his petition. Accordingly, based
on a preponderance of the evidence the owner has offered
insufficient reason to disturb the Administrator's order which is
based on the inspection, and it should be affirmed.
THEREFORE, in accordance with the Rent Stabilization Law and Code,
ORDERED, that this petition be, and the same hereby is, denied, and
that the District Rent Administrator's order be, and the same hereby