ADM. REVIEW DOCKET NO.: FE230045RO
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.: FE230045RO
DISTRICT RENT
ADMINISTRATOR'S DOCKET
NO.: EJ220007BO(DJ223062BR)
PETROS NEAMONITAKIS
PETITIONER
------------------------------------X
ORDER AND OPINION DENYING PETITION FOR ADMINISTRATIVE REVIEW
The above-named owner filed a timely petition for
administrative review of an order issued concerning the housing
accommodations known as 3086 West 1st Street, Apts. L2, R2, R9-10,
Brooklyn, N.Y.
The Commissioner has reviewed all the evidence in the record
and has carefully considered that portion of the record relevant to
the issues raised by the petition.
The issue before the Commissioner is whether the
Administrator's order was correct.
The Administrator's order being appealed, EJ220007BO was
issued on March 29, 1991. In that order, the Administrator
affirmed the finding of DJ223062BO issued September 20, 1990, that
the owner be denied eligibility for a 1990/91 Maximum Base Rent
(MBR) increase, due to the owner's failure to meet the violation
certification requirements necessary to the owner's being granted
an MBR increase, specifically the owner's failure to certify that
the requisite number of rent impairing and non rent impairing
violations were corrected.
On appeal the owner contends that the requisite number of
violations have been repaired at the subject premises. In support
of his contention, the owner submits repairmen's receipts, copies
of cancelled checks to repairmen and signed statements from
individual tenants at the subject premises, each tenant thereby
attesting to repairs.
ADM. REVIEW DOCKET NO.: FE230045RO
The Commissioner is of the opinion that this petition should
be denied.
Pursuant to Section 2202.3(h), in order to gain eligibility to
increase MBRs at a given premises, the owner must certify to the
Administrator that 80% of the non-rent impairing and 100% of the
rent impairing violations at the subject premises have been
repaired.
An examination of the file discloses that on March 15, 1990
the subject premises was inspected by the New York City Department
of Housing Preservation and Development (HPD), said HPD
investigation revealing that, contrary to his assertions on appeal
the owner had failed to make repairs to the extent required by
Section 2202.3(h).
The Commissioner notes that, of the aforementioned
documentation submitted by the owner on appeal the vast majority
(including all the repairmen's bills) predates the HPD inspection.
The Commissioner is thus of the opinion that, even if repairs such
as described by the owner on appeal were made to the subject
premises, they were of such poor quality and workmanship so as to
lead to a recurrence of the violations.
THEREFORE, in accordance with the provisions of the Rent and
Eviction Regulations, it is
ORDERED, that this petition for administrative review be, and
the same hereby is, denied, and that the order the Rent
Administrator be, and the same hereby is, affirmed.
ISSUED:
JOSEPH A. D'AGOSTA
Deputy Commissioner
|
