Docket Number: FB-620055-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. FB-620055-RO
                                            :  
          RIN REALTY CORP.,                    DRO DOCKET NO. CG-620005-AD

                              PETITIONER    : 
        ------------------------------------X                           
          
                   ORDER AND OPINION TERMINATING AND DISMISSING PROCEEDING
                           BEFORE ADMINISTRATIVE REVIEW

        On January 29, 1991, the above named owner, by its  attorney,  filed
        by certified mail (P 389 566 200) a document dated January 30, 1991, 
        denominated as a  "Supplement  To"  a  Petition  for  Administrative
        Review  to  be  considered  in  connection  with  a   Petition   for
        Administrative Review purportedly on file with the  DHCR,  appealing
        an order, issued on August 14, 1990 by  the  Rent  Administrator  at
        Gertz Plaza Jamaica, New York concerning the housing  accommodations
        known as 540 Southern Boulevard, Bronx, New York, Apartment 18-A.

        The Administrator's Order determined the tenant's complaint alleging 
        that the accommodations were subject  to  rent  control,  found  the
        premises to be rent stabilized, established the legal regulated rent 
        at $161.64 per month effective October 1,  1989,  and  directed  the
        owner to refund to the tenant all excess rent collected as of August 
        30, 1986.

        However, a thorough and diligent review of the DHCR records  by  the
        Division's Screening and Docketing Unit indicated that there was  no
        original filing of a petition  for  administrative  review  for  the
        above   captioned   premises.    Consequently   the   petition   for
        administrative review docket number in the  instant  proceeding  was
        assigned to process the owner's submissions herein.

        By a "Notice of  Opportunity  to  Present  Further  Information  and
        Evidence," dated April 23, 1991, the owner was requested to submit a 
        copy of the original petition for  administrative  review  appealing
        the Administrator's order under DRO Docket NO. CG  620005-AD  and/or
        to submit the docket number assigned to the  original  petition  for
        administrative review.

        Section 2529.2 of the Rent Stabilization Code provides, in pertinent 
        part, that a party can establish that a petition for  administrative
        review was timely filed by submitting adequate proof of mailing such 
        as an official Postal Service receipt or certificate of mailing.

        The petitioner-owner, by its attorneys, by a letter  dated  May  10,
        1991, responded that the owner had been unable to locate a copy, and 
        that its attempts to locate the  file  at  the  Division  were  also
        unsucessful.  In support of the claim of timely  filing,  the  owner
        attached a copy of affidavit by the owner's employee attesting  that
        she had timely filed the petition for administrative review.






          Docket Number: FB-620055-RO

        However, an affidavit of service,  submitted  more  than  seven  (7)
        months after the expiration of the  deadline  for  filing  a  timely
        petition for administrative review, is not the type  of  independent
        and objective evidence required under the Code to establish  that  a
        petition for administrative review was filed in a timely manner.

        One need not speculate as to the owner's intent  to  file  a  timely
        petition for administrative review.  However, the Code requires  the
        petitioner to document claims of timely filing.   The  owner  having
        failed to establish by proper documentation that  the  petition  for
        administrative review was timely filed, the owner's characterization 
        of the submissions herein as a supplement cannot be sustained.

        Since the owner  failed  to  establish  by  adequate  proof  that  a
        petition for administrative review was  filed,  or  that  there  was
        fraud, illegality or an irregularity in a vital matter sufficient to 
        warrant an extension of time to file a petition  for  administrative
        review,  the  owner's  application  cannot   be   afforded   further
        consideration.

        THEREFORE, in accordance of the provisions of the Rent Stabilization 
        Law and Code, Chapter 403 of the Laws of 1983, and  Chapter  102  of
        the Laws of 1984, it is

        ORDERED, that these proceedings be terminated in accordance with the 
        above and that the  owner's  request  to  consider  a  petition  for
        administrative review be denied.

        ISSUED:




                                                                      
                                        ELLIOT SANDER
                                        Deputy Commissioner