FI 210013-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.:   
                                        FI 210013-RO
       
                                        RENT ADMINISTRATOR'S
  GERALD BERTUNA/JNJ HOLDING CO.,       DOCKET NOS.:             
                                                                                     FD 210021-OR; (EF 210071-HW)

                                                  SUBJECT PREMISES:          
                                                  9330 Ft. Hamilton Parkway
                                   PETITIONER     Apt. 1-C, Brooklyn, N.Y.
          ----------------------------------x



             ORDER AND OPINION DENYING PETITION FOR ADMINISTRATIVE REVIEW


           The above-named owner filed a timely petition for administrative 
           review of an order issued on August 21, 1991 concerning the housing 
           accommodation relating to the above-described docket number, 
           wherein the Administrator denied the owner's rent restoration 
           application.

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

           On April 1, 1991, the owner commenced the proceeding to restore 
           rent based on the restoration of services for which a rent reduc- 
           tion order had been issued under Docket No. EF 210071-HW.  The 
           owner submitted a copy of a plumber's statement dated January 31, 
           1991, stating that "all the plumbing problems in both the kitchen 
           and bathroom have been totally repaired."  The owner also submitted 
           a July 23, 1991 Compliance Bureau letter, which considered the case 
           closed inasmuch as "the owner has satisfactorily complied with the 
           directives issued in Order Nos. EF 210071-HW and EF 220465-S", 
           based on a June 27, 1991 physical inspection.

           The Commissioner notes that the aforementioned Compliance Bureau's 
           letter cites as one of the findings of the June 27, 1991 physical 
           inspection, that the cold water pressure was slightly less than the 












          FI 210013-RO


           hot water and that there were fluctuations in temperatures of 100 
           degrees F, 115 degrees F and 98 degrees F.  The letter also advised 
           that the rent would not be restored until the Division of Housing 
           and Community Renewal (DHCR) issued an order granting the owner's 
           application for restoration of the rent.

           Thereafter, an on-site inspection of the subject apartment was 
           conducted on August 9, 1991 by a Division staff member who reported 
           that "the water fluctuates to very hot in the bathroom when cold 
           water is turned on in the kitchen and vice versa."

           Based on the August 9, 1991 inspection, the Administrator denied 
           the owner's application.

           In this petition, the owner contends in substance that the rent 
           restoration application was made in accordance with the Compliance 
           Bureau's letter and that it is "extremely irregular that the two 
           inspections made within a short time of each other would conflict 
           in outcome."

           In answer, the tenant asserts in substance that the plumbing work 
           has not been completed and is ineffective.

           After careful consideration, the Commissioner is of the opinion 
           that this petition should be denied.

           The Administrator's order was based on an August 9, 1991 on-site 
           inspection, which revealed that services had not been restored.  In 
           addition, the earlier inspection in the aforementioned compliance 
           proceeding which found that the cold water pressure was slightly 
           less than the hot water and that there were fluctuations in 
           temperatures of 100 degrees F, 115 degrees F and 98 degrees F is 
           not inconsistent with the August 9, 1991 inspection.

           The Commissioner notes that the owner has offered no evidence to 
           rebut the inspector's findings and the tenant has contended that 
           the owner's repairs are ineffective and incomplete.

           Accordingly, the Commissioner finds that the Administrator properly 
           based his determination on the entire record, including the August 
           9, 1991 inspection, and correctly determined that the owner was not 
           entitled to restoration of rent.

           This Order and Opinion is issued without prejudice to the owner's 
           rights as they may pertain to a de novo application to the Division 
           for a restoration of rent based upon the restoration of services.






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




          FI 210013-RO


           it is,

           ORDERED, that this petition be, and the same hereby is, denied, and 
           that Rent Administrator's order be, and the same hereby is, 
           affirmed.


           ISSUED:



                                                                            
                                                 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