STATE OF NEW YORK 
                                OFFICE OF RENT ADMINISTRATION
                                     GERTZ PLAZA
                               92-31 UNION HALL STREET
                              JAMAICA, NEW YORK  11433

          APPEAL OF                               DOCKET NO.: FI420377RT 

                                                  DISTRICT RENT
                                                  ADMINISTRATOR'S DOCKET
                                                  NOS.: BK421716BR
              DELIA QUINTANA                            DG420220BO


               The above-named tenant filed a timely petition for 
          administrative review of an order issued concerning the housing 
          accommodations known as 316 West 94th Street, New York, N.Y. 10025, 
          Apt. 4-A.

               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, DG420220BO was 
          issued on August 9, 1991.  In that order, the Administrator revoked 
          the finding of BK421716BR issued June 22, 1989, that the owner be 
          granted 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 

               On appeal, the tenant individually objected to the 
          Administrator's order.  The tenant alleges the landlord had not met 
          the prescribed Violation Certification requirements, and that the 
          Violations were not corrected until after August 1991.  The tenant 
          also contends, that the MBR increase should not be retroactive.

          ADM. REVIEW DOCKET NO.: FI420377RT

               The owner in his response to the tenant's allegations, claims 
          he doesn't understand the basis for the PAR, and that per 
          inspection of the premises, that he has cleared the required number 
          of Violations, in order to gain an increase for the 1988/89 MBR 

               The Commissioner is of the opinion that this Petition for 
          Administrative Review should be denied.

               Pursuant to Section 2202.3(h), in order to gain eligibility to 
          increases MBRs at a given premises, the owner must certify to the 
          Administrator that 80% of the non-rent impairing and 100% of the 
          rent impairing Violations at the subject premises have been 
          repaired timely.

               An examination of the records discloses that the owner cleared 
          a sufficient number of violations from the subject premises, so as 
          to gain eligibility to raise MBRs for 1988/89.

               As for the tenant's possible argument that the Administrator 
          acted beyond the scope of his authority in giving the order under 
          review herein retroactive effect:  Generally, orders issued by the 
          Administrator are effective on a prospective basis only.  However, 
          in the instant proceeding the owner was initially denied 
          eligibility to raise MBRs at the subject premises for the 1988/89 
          cycle.  (The first day of the 1988/89 cycle is January 1, 1988.)  
          The owner thus exercised its right to file a challenge of that 
          order.  Due to the thus lengthier nature of the instant proceeding 
          the order granting eligibility to the owner was not issued until 
          August 9, 1991-over three years after the effective date.

               In these circumstances, to avoid prejudicing the due process 
          rights of the owner, the Administrator was compelled to issue the 
          order under review herein on a "retroactive" basis.

               The Commissioner notes that a similar result will be obtained 
          in all such proceedings regardless of the identity of the party 
          filing a challenge or benefiting from the Administrator's decision.

               THEREFORE, in accordance with the provisions of the Rent and 
          Eviction Regulations, it is

          ADM. REVIEW DOCKET NO.: FI420377RT

               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.


                                             LULA M. ANDERSON
                                             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