ADM. REVIEW DOCKET NO.: FE230237RO
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.: FE230237RO
DISTRICT RENT
MAXEM REALTY CO. ADMINISTRATOR'S DOCKET
BY EUGENE M. TORTORA NO.: EH220053BO
(DK225552BR)
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 1620 Avenue I, various apartments,
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, EH220053BO was
issued on May 3, 1991. In that order, the Administrator affirmed
the finding of DK225552BR, issued August 3, 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 clear more than 80%
of the non rent impairing and 100% of the rent impairing violations
of record against the subject premises.
On appeal, the owner argues that the requisite number of
violations have been cleared from the subject premises. As
evidence, the owner submits on appeal a copy of a New York City
Department of Housing Preservation and Development (HPD) List of
Pending Violations (LPV). Various Violation numbers on the LPV
have been circled and inscribed "Done" or "co-op".
ADM. REVIEW DOCKET NO.: FE230237RO
The Commissioner is of the opinion that this petition shouLd
be denied.
On appeal, as well as at challenge below, the owner's
submission of evidence in support of his contention is limited to
the LPV as described above. The owner obviously intends his
notation of a particular violation as "done" to prove to the
Commissioner that that violation has been repaired.
The owner similarly intends the inscription "co-op" to absolve
him of the duty to clear violations at an apartment thus denoted.
The Commissioner cannot regard such unverifiable and self-
serving evidence as proof of the owner's repair of the violations.
The Commissioner notes that the ownership status of a
particular apartment has no bearing on the owner's duty to repair
violations in that apartment. Even if the owner was able to prove
on appeal to the Commissioner's satisfaction that he had not
repaired certain violations because they occurred in co-op
apartments, the Commissioner is of the opinion that, if the owner
had not otherwise repaired the required number of violations he
would be denied eligibility to raise MBRs at the subject premises.
THEREFORE, in accordance with 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 of the Rent
Administrator be, and the same hereby is, affirmed.
ISSUED:
JOSEPH A. D'AGOSTA
Deputy Commissioner
|