FK 110484 RT
                                  STATE OF NEW YORK
                            OFFICE OF RENT ADMINISTRATION
                                     GERTZ PLAZA
                               92-31 UNION HALL STREET
                               JAMAICA, NEW YORK 11433

          APPEAL OF                               DOCKET NO.: FK 110484 RT
          BARBARA MERRITT                         RENT
                                                  ADMINISTRATOR'S DOCKET 
                                                  NO.: EA 110378 S

               On November 12, 1991 the above named petitioner-tenant timely 
          refiled a Petition for Administrative Review against an order of 
          the Rent Administrator issued June 20, 1991. The order concerned 
          housing accommodations known as Apt 4K located at 88-05 Merrick 
          Blvd., Jamaica, N.Y.  The Administrator denied the tenant's 
          application for a rent reduction and terminated the proceeding 
          based on the failure of the tenant to afford access to a DHCR 

               The Commissioner has reviewed the record and carefully 
          considered that portion relevant to the issues raised by this 

               The tenant commenced this proceeding on January 26, 1990 by 
          filing a Statement of Complaint of Decrease in Services wherein  
          she alleged that there were water leaks in the bathroom, and 
          contaminated water backing into the bathtub and basin.

               The owner was served with a copy of the complaint and afforded 
          an opportunity to respond. The owner filed responses to the 
          complaint on February 5, 1990 and June 18, 1990.  The owner stated, 
          in part, that the tenant was refusing to provide access to the 
          subject apartment. The owner also submitted documentation, in the 
          form of requests for access, to substantiate the owner's 
               The Administrator sent a Notice of Inspection (For Access) to 
          the parties on May 21, 1991.  The notice stated that an inspector 
          would visit the apartment on May 30, 1991 at 11 AM.  Both parties 
          were directed to be present so as to provide access to the owner 
          for the purposes of attending to repairs.

               The inspector, building manager and superintendent appeared at 

          FK 110484 RT

          the apartment at the time set forth in the notice.  However, the 
          tenant failed to keep the appointment and the tenant's son refused 
          to give access to the apartment.

               The Administrator issued the order here under review on June 
          20, 1991 and denied the tenant's application based on the failure 
          to afford access to the DHCR inspector on May 30, 1991.  The 
          proceeding was ordered terminated.

               On appeal the tenant states that she was not aware that the 
          inspector was coming on May 30, 1991 and suggests that the 
          inspector reschedule the inspection.  The owner filed a response to 
          the petition on August 1, 1991 and stated, in substance, that the 
          Administrator's order was correctly issued and should be affirmed.

               After careful review of the evidence in the record, the 
          Commissioner is of the opinion that the petition should be denied.

               The relevant inquiry in deciding this administrative appeal is 
          whether the Administrator was correct in issuing the order here 
          under review based on the evidence in the record at the time of 
          issuance.  It is clear from that record that the notice of the 
          appointment for the inspection was correctly addressed and not 
          returned by the Post Office.  It was the responsibility of the 
          tenant to be available on the date in question or make arrangements 
          for entry to the apartment by the owner and his workers.   The 
          tenant has not offered an acceptable excuse for the failure to 
          afford access.  Accordingly, the order here under review is 
          affirmed.  This order and opinion is issued without prejudice to 
          the tenant's right to refile for a rent reduction.

               THEREFORE, pursuant to the Rent Stabilization Law and Code it 

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


                                             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