Adm. Rev. Docket No.: FE 420202-RO
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 : ADMINISTRATIVE REVIEW
APPEAL OF : DOCKET NO.: FE 420202 RO
R.S.P. REALTY ASSOCIATES, : DISTRICT RENT ADMINISTRATOR'S
: DOCKET NOS.: EG 420112-OR/
PETITIONER : DF 420563-S
ORDER AND OPINION DENYING PETITION FOR ADMINISTRATIVE REVIEW
On May 16, 1991, the above-named owner filed a timely petition for
administrative review of an order issued on May 3, 1991 concerning
the housing accommodations relating to the above-described docket
The issue herein is whether conditions upon which an order was
issued reducing the rent have been corrected, warranting restoration
of the stabilized rent.
The Commissioner has reviewed all the evidence in the record and has
carefully considered that portion of the record relevant to the
issue raised by the petition.
On July 10, 1990, the owner commenced this proceeding by filing an
application to restore rent based on restoration of services.
In its answer filed on August 22, 1990, the tenant denied the
allegations set forth in the owner's application or otherwise
asserted that the repairs are defective and not completed.
Thereafter on January 18, 1991, a No Access inspection of the
subject apartment was conducted by a D.H.C.R. inspector who
confirmed the existence of defective conditions. Both the owner and
the tenant were present and agreed that the access dates should be
January 21, 1991, January 22, 1991 and January 23, 1991.
On February 22, 1991, the tenant wrote D.H.C.R. that "none of the
... violations have been repaired;" and that he was ready to provide
In a reply dated March 14, 1991, the owner alleged in substance that
the tenant refused access for repairs.
The Administrator issued this May 3, 1991 order based on the January
18, 1991 inspection, denying the owner's application and continuing
the rent reduction in effect.
In this petition, the owner states in substance (1) that the tenant
refused access for repairs and (2) that the tenant caused the damage
to the repairs.
Adm. Rev. Docket No.: FE 420202-RO
After careful consideration, the Commissioner is of the opinion that
this petition should be denied.
The record clearly shows that a No Access Inspection was conducted
by a D.H.C.R. inspector who confirmed the existence of defective
conditions. In this No Access inspection, both the owner and the
tenant were present and agreed that the access dates for repairs
should be on January 21, 1991, January 22, 1991 and January 23,
1991. The owner has not proven in the proceeding below or in this
petition that the tenant refused access. The letters sent by the
owner to the tenant are general in nature, do not specify that the
owner requests access on a particular date to make repairs, and were
not sent certified mail/return receipt requested. One letter dated
June 27, 1990 was sent before the owner applied for rent
restoration. Another letter dated May 8, 1991 was sent after the
The owner's allegation that the tenant caused the defective repairs
is mere conjecture unproven in the record. The tenant did not only
deny the owner's allegation but asserted its readiness to provide
access. The evidence submitted by the owner about the "tenant's
neglect" and "abuse" is nil.
This Order and Opinion is issued without prejudice to the owner's
filing another application for rent restoration, if the facts so
THEREFORE, in accordance with the Rent & Eviction Regulations, it is
ORDERED, that this petition be, and the same hereby is, denied, and
that the District Rent Administrator's order be, and the same hereby