FG 620035-RO
                                  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
          APPEALS OF                              DOCKET NO.:   
                                                  FG 620035-RO                
              BEE and BEE MANAGEMENT CORP.,       
                                                  RENT          ADMINISTRATOR'S
                                                  DOCKET NO.: 
                                  PETITIONER      EJ 620040-OR
          ----------------------------------x


                     ORDER AND OPINION REMANDING THE PROCEEDING
                              TO THE RENT ADMINISTRATOR


          On July 5, 1991, the  above-named  owner  filed  a  petition  for
          administrative review of an order issued on June 3,  1991,  by  a
          Rent Administrator concerning the housing accommodation known  as
          Apartment 5-E, 2308 University Avenue, Bronx, New  York,  wherein
          the owner's application to restore the rent was denied.

          The Commissioner has reviewed all of the evidence in  the  record
          and has carefully considered that portion relevant to the  issues
          raised by the petition for review.

          On September 27, 1990 the subject owner filed an application  for
          a rent restoration based on its alleged restoration  of  service.
          The application included the tenant's signed consent dated August 
          30, 1990.

          On November 5, 1990, the  tenant  interposed  an  answer  to  the
          owner's application wherein it was  alleged  that  the  areas  of
          water damaged walls and ceilings had been repainted but that  the
          tenant was as yet unable to  determine  whether  the  leak  which
          caused the damage had been repaired.   She  further  stated  that
          she was not afforded the opportunity to read the form  which  she
          had signed.

          On February 21, 1991 a physical inspection of the subject  apart-
          ment was carried out by the Division  of  Housing  and  Community
          Renewal (DHCR).  The inspector, in his report, noted that there 


          was evidence of water stains on the kitchen  wall  and  that  the
          bathroom walls and ceiling  were  repaired  in  an  unworkmanlike
          manner.

          On June 3, 1991, the Rent Administrator  issued  the  order  here
          under  review,  finding  that  no  restoration  of  services  had
          occurred and denying the owner's application.

          In its petition for  administrative  review  the  owner  requests







          FG 620035-RO
          reversal of the Rent Administrator's order alleging that  repairs
          had been effectuated prior to the inspection and that the  tenant
          had consented to the rent restoration.

          After careful consideration the Commissioner is  of  the  opinion
          that  this  proceeding   should   be   remanded   to   the   Rent
          Administrator.         

          The Commissioner notes that the tenant's November 5, 1990  answer
          in  opposition  to  the  owner's  rent  restoration   application
          effectively revoked the consent which was signed  on  August  30,
          1990.  However, the Commissioner notes that a copy of this answer 
          was not served on the owner.  This failure deprived the owner  of
          notice that problems still existed or had recurred  and  deprived
          it of the opportunity to-inspect the apartment or  to  effectuate
          further repairs.

          According, the Commissioner finds that the owner was  denied  due
          process in the proceeding under review and that  this  proceeding
          should be remanded to the Rent Administrator for furth r  proces-
          sing of the rent restoration application.


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

          ORDERED, that  this  proceeding  be,  and  the  same  hereby  is,
          remanded to the Rent  Administrator  for  further  processing  in
          accordance with this order and opinion.


          ISSUED:



                                                                           
                                                ELLIOT SANDER
                                                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