Adm. Rev. Docket Number: FF 110080-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.: FF 110080-RO 
                                            :  
                                               DISTRICT RENT ADMINISTRATOR'S
           ESCO ASSOCIATES,                 :  DOCKET NOS.: FA 110147-OR/
                                                            EG 110416-S
                                            :  SUBJECT PREMISES:
                                                94-26 34 Rd., Apt. No. D1,
                            PETITIONER      :   Jackson Heights, N.Y. 11372
        ------------------------------------X                           
          
           ORDER AND OPINION DENYING PETITION FOR ADMINISTRATIVE REVIEW

        On June  4,  1991,  the  above-named  owner  filed  a  petition  for
        administrative review of an order issued on May 28, 1991  concerning
        the housing accommodations relating to  the  above-described  docket
        number.  

        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 January 15, 1991, the owner commenced this proceeding  by  filing
        an application to restore rent because "the tenant has  unreasonably
        refused to permit owner/agent to restore service."

        In its answer filed on February 14, 1991, the tenant denied refusing 
        access and otherwise asserted that repairs can only be done  as  per
        her letters to the owner "every afternoon after 5 P.M. as well as on 
        Saturdays."

        Thereafter, an inspection  of  the  subject  apartment  pursuant  to
        Policy Statement (90-5) "Arranging Repairs/No Access Inspection" was 
        conducted on April 9, 1991 by a  D.H.C.R.  inspector  who  confirmed
        that services have not been restored.

        In this  inspection,  both  the  tenant  and  the  owner/agent  were
        present.  The inspector reported that the tenant refused  access  to
        owner's workers stating "she has to go to work and  she's  available
        (at home) everyday after 4:00 P.M."  The inspector further  asserted
        that the "owner's worker assistant... had no tools at  the  time  of
        inspection."

        On May 28, 1991, the Administrator issued  an  order  based  on  the
        inspection, denying the owner's application and continuing the  rent
        reduction in effect.  The Administrator also added that  the  "owner
        and his repair person were not ready, willing and able to  make  the
        repairs at the time  of  "No  Access"  inspection  as  per  D.H.C.R.
        inspector."

        In  this  petition,  the  owner  denied  the  inspection  report  or
        otherwise asserted that it was available then to do repairs  in  the







        Adm. Rev. Docket Number: FF 110080-RO
        subject apartment, but that the tenant refused access.

        In reply, the  tenant  stated  in  substance  that  the  inspector's
        findings should be upheld.

        After careful consideration, the Commissioner is of the opinion that 
        this petition should be denied.

        Although the owner contends that  the  tenant  refused  access,  the
        Commissioner notes that the owner failed to  prove  said  contention
        pursuant to Policy Statement  (90-5)  "Arranging  Repairs/No  Access
        Inspections."  The record clearly shows that though all parties were 
        present  at  the  No  Access   Inspection,   the   "owner's   worker
        assistant... had no tools at the time of inspection."

        Accordingly, the Administrator correctly concluded that  the  "owner
        and his repair person were not ready, willing and able to  make  the
        repairs at the time  of  "No  Access"  inspection  as  per  D.H.C.R.
        inspector."

        The parties are advised that if a No Access  inspection  has  to  be
        scheduled  again,  said  inspection  is  conducted  during   regular
        business hours and for immediate repairs.

        THEREFORE, in accordance with the Rent Stabilization Law  and  Code,
        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 
        is, affirmed.

        ISSUED:




                                                                      
                                        ELLIOT SANDER
                                        Deputy Commissioner


    

TenantNet Home | TenantNet Forum | New York Tenant Information
DHCR Information | DHCR Decisions | Housing Court Decisions | New York Rent Laws
Disclaimer | Privacy Policy | Contact Us

Subscribe to our Mailing List!
Your Email      Full Name