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.:FE110384RO
Grenadier Realty Corp., RENT ADMINISTRATOR'S
PREMISES: Apt. 1
74-11 Little Neck Parkway
PETITIONER Glen Oaks, NY
ORDER AND OPINION DENYING PETITION FOR ADMINISTRATIVE REVIEW
The above-named owner filed a timely petition for administrative
review against an order issued on May 9, 1991 by the Rent
Administrator 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
issues raised by the petition.
The owner commenced this proceeding on January 17, 1991 by filing
an application to restore rent based on the tenant's unreasonable
refusal to permit the owner to restore service. The owner submitted
copies of various letters requesting access on December 4 and 11,
1990 and January 15, 1991.
DHCR mailed a copy of the application to the tenant.
The parties were informed of a No Access inspection scheduled for
April 4, 1991. The Notice of Inspection (For Access) states in
relevant part that the parties are directed to be present so as to
provide access to the owner for the purposes of attending to
repairs and/or restoration of services at this time; and that
failure of the owner and/or his repair person(s) to be present and
ready to attend to repairs and/or restore services, or failure of
the tenant to keep this appointment for repairs will result in a
determination based solely on the evidence presently in the record.
On April 4, 1991, a No-Access inspection was conducted by a DHCR
staff member who reported that the bathroom wall has been plastered
but not painted, and that the area between the top of the stove and
the oven is rusted. Both building management and the tenant were
present. There was no indication that repairmen all set to work
were present. It is not clear from the inspection report whether
the parties were ready for repairs at that time.
By an order dated May 9, 1991, the Administrator denied the owner's
In this petition, the owner contends in substance that the painting
was not completed because the tenant refused access; and that the
vendor for stoves and refrigerators attempted numerous times to
contact the tenant to replace her stove but the tenant refused
access. The owner asserts that during the April 4, 1991 inspection,
it was ready to replace the stove with a reconditioned one and to
paint the bathroom, but the tenant wanted a new stove and that the
painting had to wait because her husband was sick.
DHCR mailed a copy of the petition to the tenant.
After careful consideration, the Commissioner is of the opinion
that the petition should be denied.
It is not clear from the April 4, 1991 No Access inspection whether
the parties were ready for repairs of the defective conditions.
Both parties appear to agree that the illness of the tenant's
husband delayed the work.
However, the record fails to establish that the tenant refused
access at the No Access inspection. Moreover, the inspector's
report had no indication that the owner was capable of doing
repairs at that time. There were no workers present at that
THEREFORE, in accordance with the Rent Stabilization Law and Code
and Operational Bulletin 84-1, it is
ORDERED, that this petition be, and the same hereby is, denied and
that the Rent Administrator's order be, and the same hereby is,
LULA M. ANDERSON