STATE OF NEW YORK
DIVISION OF HOUSING AND COMMUNITY RENEWAL
OFFICE OF RENT ADMINISTRATION
92-31 UNION HALL STREET
JAMAICA, NEW YORK 11433
IN THE MATTER OF THE ADMINISTRATIVE
APPEAL OF ADMINISTRATIVE REVIEW
DOCKET NOS: FE120519RT
Rose Saponaro D.R.O. DOCKET NO:
ORDER AND OPINION GRANTING PETITION FOR ADMINISTRATIVE REVIEW IN
On May 24, 1991 the above-named petitioner-tenant timely refiled
a Petition for Administrative Review against an order issued on
March 15, 1991 by the Director of the Maximum Base Rent (MBR)
Unit, 92-31 Union Hall Street, Jamaica, NY concerning housing
accommodations known as 45-12 50th Avenue, Woodside, NY,
The Commissioner has reviewed all of the evidence in the record
and has carefully considered that portion of the record relevant
to the issue raised by the administrative appeal.
On March 15, 1991, the Director issued the order appealed herein,
determining that the owner had met the prescribed violation
certification requirements for MBR increases effective January 1,
1990 and affirming the MBR Order issued on April 17, 1990 under
Docket No. DK126506BR.
In this petition, the tenant contends that 1990-91 MBR increases
should be revoked because the owner has not restored those
services which were the subject of two rent reduction orders
issued by the DHCR for the subject apartment/building; the tenant
subsequently filed two other service decrease complaints with the
DHCR; the tenant has filed several service complaints against the
owner with the New York City Department of Housing Preservation
and Development (HPD); the owner was ordered to pay a penalty as
a result of a Housing Court proceeding concerning the service of
heat and hot water; and the owner failed to make repairs and
produce a copy of the 1989 Master Building Rent Schedule as
directed during a non-payment proceeding in Housing Court.
Docket No. FE120519RT - 2 -
In response, the owner asserts, in substance, that the
law/regulations have been fully complied with.
The Commissioner is of the opinion that this petition should be
granted in part.
DHCR policy provides that a rent reduction order issued for
failure to maintain services will bar the collectibility of any
subsequent increase in the Maximum Collectible Rent (MCR) after
the effective date of the rent reduction order until a rent
restoration order has been issued.
In this case, the record indicates that the owner met all
requirements, including violation removal requirements in order
to be eligible for 1990-91 MBR increases effective January 1,
1990. The record further reveals that two rent reduction orders
have been issued for the owner's failure to maintain services at
the subject premises under Docket Nos. CL-110439-S, issued
December 26, 1989, and DA-130020-B, issued March 7, 1990. A
review of the DHCR's records indicates that no rent restoration
order has been issued for either of the above mentioned rent
reduction orders. Accordingly, the owner is barred from
collecting any MCR increases granted subsequent to December 26,
1989 (the effective date of the earlier reduction order) until
the rents have been restored.
Based thereon, the Commissioner finds that the owner is barred
from collecting 1990-91 MBR increases which were granted on April
17, 1990 under Docket No. DK126506BR and affirmed in the order
appealed herein, effective January 1, 1990, until rent
restoration orders are issued for both of the above mentioned
rent reduction orders.
Therefore, in accordance with the Rent and Eviction Regulations,
ORDERED, that this petition be, and the same hereby is, granted
in part, and the Director's order be, and the same hereby is,
modified and it is further
ORDERED, that the owner shall pay to the tenant, any excess rent,
if any, arising as a result of this order within thirty (30) days
from the date of issuance hereof.