Docket Number: FH 110091-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
APPEAL OF DOCKET NO.: FH 110091-RO
DISTRICT RENT ADMINISTRATOR'S
GLOBAL MANAGEMENT, DOCKET NO.: EJ 110663-S
SUBJECT PREMISES:
PETITIONER 87-77 169th St., Apt. No. C7,
----------------------------------X Jamaica, NY 11432
ORDER AND OPINION REMANDING PROCEEDING ON APPEAL
On August 12, 1991, the above-named owner filed a timely petition
for administrative review of an order issued on July 25, 1991,
concerning t e housing accommodations relating to the above-
described docket number.
This administrative appeal is being determined pursuant to the
provisions of 2520.6(r) and 2523.4 of the Rent Stabilization Code.
The Commissioner has reviewed all the evidence in the record and
has carefully considered that portion of the record relevant to
the issue raised by the administrative appeal.
This proceeding was commenced on October 22, 1990 when the tenant
filed a complaint asserting that the owner had failed to maintain
certain services in the subject apartment.
In its answer filed on November 9, 1990, the owner asserted that
all required repairs in this subject apartment had been completed.
In another answer filed on December 26, 1990, the owner stated
that "the tenant has withdrawn the alleged complaint."
In a reply filed on May 8, 1991, the tenant asserted that it
"never withdrew the complaint"; that "the owner used a paper
signed" by her for some alleged service, to be used "against us in
DHCR"; and that the owner did "not finish the job."
The owner was not informed of the tenant's rebuttal of the alleged
withdrawal and not afforded the opportunity to respond to the
allegation of forgery.
Thereafter on June 17, 1991, the subject apartment was inspected
by D.H.C.R. which confirmed the existence of defective conditions.
The Administrator directed on July 25, 1991 restoration of these
services and further ordered a reduction of the stabilized rent.
In this petition, the owner repeats its answer below that the
tenant withdrew the complaint.
Docket Number: FH 110091-RO
After careful consideration, the Commissioner is of the opinion
that this petition should be remanded to the Administrator for
further processing.
It is noted that in the proceeding below, the Administrator failed
to inform the owner of the tenant's rebuttal of the alleged
withdrawal; and that the owner was therefore not afforded the
opportunity to respond to the allegation of forgery.
The Administrator is directed to allow the owner the opportunity
to respond to the tenant's allegation of the owner forging the
tenant's withdrawal, and to revoke the rent reduction order. The
tenant, however, is advised not to pay any increases until the
issue of forgery is resolved.
If the Administrator makes a determination that the alleged
tenant's withdrawal is a forgery, the Administrator is directed to
reinvoke the rent reduction order with its original date as the
effective date of rent reduction.
THEREFORE, in accordance with the Rent Stabilization Law and Code,
it is
ORDERED, that this petition be, and the same hereby is, remanded
to the Administrator for further processing and that the Adminis-
trator's order be, and the same hereby is, revoked in accordance
with this Order and Opinion.
ISSUED:
ELLIOT SANDER
Deputy Commissioner
|
