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

          APPEAL OF                               DOCKET NO.: FK230022RT

                                                  DISTRICT RENT
               VARIOUS TENANTS                    ADMINISTRATOR'S DOCKET
                                                  NO.: EI220196BO


               The above-named tenants filed a timely petition for 
          administrative review of an order issued concerning the housing 
          accommodations known as 3096 Brighton 6th Street, various 
          apartments, Brooklyn, N.Y.

               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, EI220196BO was 
          issued on October 11, 1991.  In that order, the Administrator 
          revoked the finding of DL220342BR, issued August 30, 1990, that the 
          owner be denied eligibility for a 1990/91 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.  In the proceeding under appeal herein the owner 
          submitted proof to the Administrator that, contrary to the finding 
          of DL220342BR the owner had cleared a sufficient number of 
          violations from the subject premises in order to gain for himself 
          eligibility  to raise MBRs at the subject premises for 1990/91. The 
          Administrator concurred in this finding and reversed its earlier 
          order denying eligibility.  The tenants then submitted the instant 
          appeal before the Commissioner.

          ADM. REVIEW DOCKET NO.: FK230022RT

               On appeal the tenants charge that there is an outstanding 
          order reducing rents at the subject premises, and that the 
          Administrator was therefore in error in granting the owner 
          eligibility to raise rents. 

               The Commissioner is of the opinion that this petition should 
          be denied.

               On appeal the tenants named CJ230032B as the outstanding rent 
          reduction order.  An examination of the record discloses that this 
          order was issued on July 6, 1989, and that the Administrator found 
          therein various building-wide violations including (but not limited 
          to) defects in elevator service.  The Administrator thereupon 
          ordered a rent reduction at the subject premises.

               The owner appealed the Administrator's decision, to the 
          Commissioner under docket #DH230390RO.  In an order issued on 
          October 9, 1991 the Commissioner granted the owner's appeal in part 
          and remanded the proceeding to the Administrator.  The Commissioner 
          notes that the Commissioner ordered (inter alia) that "...The 
          automatic stay abatement is...continued until a new 
          order is issued upon remand..."

               The Commissioner is thus of the opinion that the tenants were 
          correct in their allegation made at appeal that there was a rent 
          reduction order outstanding against the subject premises as of the 
          effective date (January 1, 1990) of the Administrator's order being 
          appealed herein.  The Commissioner however, does not agree with the 
          tenants' further allegation that, inasmuch as there was a rent 
          reduction order outstanding against the subject premises  the owner 
          should therefore be denied eligibility to raise MBRs at the subject 

               The fact that there is a rent-reducing order outstanding 
          against the subject premises does not bar the owner of those 
          premises from eligibility to raise MBRs.  The owner is, however, 
          barred from collecting the MBR increase pending the issuance of an 
          order of rent restoration, at which time the MBR increase becomes 
          collectible prospectively only.  

               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, denied, and that the order of the Rent 

          ADM. REVIEW DOCKET NO.: FK230022RT

          Administrator be, and the same hereby is, affirmed.


                                             JOSEPH A. D'AGOSTA
                                             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