FL620105RT
                                  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.: FL620105RT
                                                  
          BETTY WRIGHT                            RENT
                                                  ADMINISTRATOR'S DOCKET 
                                                  NO.: EG620217S
                                  PETITIONER            
          ----------------------------------x


            ORDER AND OPINION GRANTING PETITION FOR ADMINISTRATIVE REVIEW
                   AND REMANDING PROCEEDING TO RENT ADMINISTRATOR

               On December 11, 1991 the above named petitioner-tenant filed 
          a Petition for Administrative Review against an order of the Rent 
          Administrator issued November 7, 1991. The order concerned housing 
          accommodations known as Apt. 5D located at 2979 Marion Avenue, 
          Bronx, N.Y..  The Administrator denied the tenant's complaint based 
          on a finding that the tenant had not provided access to the subject 
          apartment for purposes of a physical inspection.

               The Commissioner has reviewed the record and carefully 
          considered that portion relevant to the issues raised by this 
          appeal.

               The tenant commenced this proceeding on July 6, 1990 by filing 
          a Statement of Complaint of Decrease in Services and alleged, in 
          sum, that the owner was not maintaining certain required services.
          She listed as her mailing address a post office box located in the 
          Bronx.

               The owner was served with a copy of the complaint and afforded 
          an opportunity to respond. The owner filed a response on October 
          15, 1990 and stated, in relevant part, that the tenant was refusing 
          the owner access to the subject apartment. The owner submitted 
          documentation that it had complied with the procedure in DHCR's 
          Policy Statement 90-5 regarding the sending of certified letters to 
          the tenant requesting access. The owner requested that a "no 
          access" inspection of the subject apartment be ordered. 
           
               The Administrator ordered a physical inspection of the subject 
          apartment.  A notice was sent to the tenant at her building and 
          apartment address and not to the post office box she cited on the 
          complaint.  The tenant was notified that the inspection would take 
          place on October 9, 1990 and October 10, 1990 between the hours of 












          FL620105RT

          10AM and 4PM. The inspector attempted to gain access to the subject 
          apartment on both days but reported that the tenant failed to keep 
          the appointments.

               The Administrator issued the order hereunder review on 
          November 7, 1991 and denied the complaint based on the tenant's 
          failure to provide access to the inspector.

               On appeal the tenant states that she was not notified of the 
          scheduled DHCR inspections described above and that any notices 
          sent to her may have been sent to the wrong mailing address.  The 
          petition was served on the owner on December 30, 1991. 

               The owner filed a response on August 13, 1992 and stated that
          the tenant's petition did not set forth any basis for reversal of 
          the Administrator's order, that the tenant had failed to provide 
          access upon request and that the petition should be denied.
           
               After careful review of the evidence in the record, the 
          Commissioner is of the opinion that the petition should be granted 
          and the proceeding should be remanded to the Administrator.

               It is apparent from the record that the Administrator did not 
          send the notice of the scheduled inspections to the tenant at her 
          post office box which the tenant indicated as her mailing address 
          but rather to the tenant's apartment address.  The tenant is 
          correct in arguing that the Administrator erred in doing so.  Since 
          the tenant never got proper notice of the inspections, the petition 
          must be granted and the proceeding remanded to the Administrator 
          for a new physical inspection to be conducted after proper notice 
          to the tenant at her mailing address.

               THEREFORE, pursuant to the Rent Stabilization Law and Code it 
          is 

               ORDERED, that this petition be, and the same hereby is, 
          granted to the extent of remanding this proceeding to the 
          Administrator for further processing consistent with this order and 
          opinion.

          ISSUED:



                                                                             
                                             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