Docket No. FK430345RO
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.: FK430345RO
DISTRICT RENT
Serencha Realty Corporation ADMINISTRATOR'S DOCKET
c/o Aro Management, Inc. NO.: DG420397BO(BL428824BR)
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 362 West 52nd Street, Apartments #41 & 54,
New York, New York.
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, DG420397BO was issued
on October 25, 1991. In that order, the Administrator affirmed the
finding of BL428824BR issued June 22, 1989, that the owner be
denied eligibility for a 1988/89 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.
On appeal, the owner states that "all rent-impairing violations
have been corrected .." The owner submits a copy of its challenge
submitted below, in which the owner lists, by violation# various
violations which are cross-referred to copies of paid checks,
invoices, and/or tenant's statements which were submitted by the
owner to confirm its claims of repair.
The Commissioner is of the opinion that the petition should be
Docket No. FK430345RO
denied.
Section 2202.3(h) of the New York State Rent and Eviction
Regulations states that, in order to obtain eligibility to raise
MBRs at a given premises for a given cycle, the owner must certify
to the Administrator inter alia, that 100% of the rent-impairing
and 80% of the non rent-impairing violations of record against the
premises as of one year before the effective date of the order of
eligibility have been removed. (The effective date is usually the
first day of the cycle. In the instant proceeding, the record date
is January 1, 1987.)
A List of Pending Violations reveals that, as of January 1,
1987 there were four rent-impairing and 47 non rent-impairing
violations outstanding against the subject premises. Thus, to gain
eligibility to raise 1988/89 MBRs at the subject premises the owner
would have to certify to the Administrator that all of the rent-
impairing as well at least 38 (47 X 80%=37.6) of the non-impairing
violations had been removed.
The Commissioner is of the opinion that the owner has failed to
meet this burden. On appeal, the owner identifies 23 violations
which it claims were removed. The Commissioner notes that none of
those violations were rent-impairing violations. The Commissioner
also notes that, not withstanding the fact that the owner has
failed to remove any rent-impairing violations from the subject
premises, the owner has failed to remove a sufficient number of non
rent-impairing violations from the subject premises.
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, and that the order of the Rent Administrator
be, and the same hereby is, affirmed.
ISSUED:
Joseph A. D'Agosta
Deputy Commissioner
|
