ADM. REVIEW DOCKET NO.: GE 110127 RO
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.:
GE 110127 RO
:
RENT ADMINISTRATOR'S
DOCKET NO.:
FJ 110110 OR
STEPHEN GOLLER
PETITIONER :
------------------------------------X
ORDER AND OPINION GRANTING PETITION FOR ADMINISTRATIVE REVIEW
On May 8, 1992, the above-named petitioner-owner filed a
petition for administrative review of an order issued on April 29,
1992, by the Rent Administrator, concerning the housing
accommodation known as Apartment B3, 37-05 88th Street, Jackson
Heights, New York, wherein the Administrator denied the owner's
rent restoration application because an inspection revealed that
not all services had been restored.
The Commissioner has reviewed all of the evidence in the
record and has carefully considered that portion of the record
relevant to the issue raised by the administrative appeal.
The record indicates that the owner filed an application to
restore rent on October 23, 1991 alleging that all services for
which the rent had been reduced in an order issued on June 13, 1991
(Docket NO. FB 110139-S) had been restored. Specifically, the
owner asserted that the tenant was not home for extermination
services on March 19, 1991, April 16, 1991, May 21, 1991, and June
18, 1991 and that the apartment was served by the exterminator on
July 16, 1991 and August 20, 1991. The owner also claimed that the
bedroom switch had been repaired, the bathroom ceiling was painted
and plastered, the bedroom door was refit, and new replacement
windows had been installed.
ADM. REVIEW DOCKET NO.: GE 110127 RO
The application was served on the tenant on November 6, 1991
but no response was received.
A physical inspection of the apartment on March 31, 1992
revealed evidence of roaches and rodents in the kitchen and an ill-
fitting bedroom door. All other repairs were found to have been
completed.
Based on this inspection, the owner's application was denied.
In the petition for administrative review, the owner asserts
that while the restoration application proceeding was pending, a
simultaneous noncompliance proceeding was closed on April 28, 1992
on the ground that the tenant had stated that the owner had been
providing extermination services on a regular monthly basis but
that sometimes the tenant chose not to provide access. With regard
to the bedroom door, the owner alleges that it was repaired and
that if it broke again, it is a new and different condition than
what was described in the original complaint.
The tenant did not answer the petition.
After careful consideration of the evidence of record, the
Commissioner is of the opinion that the petition should be granted
and the owner's rent restoration application should be granted.
In the related noncompliance proceeding, the tenant advised
the Division on March 2, 1992 that all repairs for which the rent
had been reduced in Docket FB 110139 S had been completed except
for the evidence of roaches and rodents in the kitchen. Further
communication with the tenant resulted in a statement by the tenant
that although monthly extermination services are provided, the
tenant chooses not to stay home and asserts that the service should
be offered on weekends. Based on these statements which are
consistent with the owner's statements in the application that the
tenant was not home when the exterminator came, the Commissioner
finds that the owner has fulfilled its obligation to provide
regular exterminator service and the evidence of roaches and
rodents revealed in the inspection cannot be attributable to the
owner's failure to maintain required services.
Similarly, since the tenant advised in the same March 2, 1992
letter to the Division that the bedroom door had been repaired, the
defect detected by the inspector a few weeks later must be a new
condition and should not bar granting the owner's application. The
tenant may file a new complaint citing this condition.
It is also noted that the tenant did not oppose either the
rent restoration application or the petition.
ADM. REVIEW DOCKET NO.: GE 110127 RO
THEREFORE, in accordance with the Rent Stabilization Law and
Code, it is
ORDERED, that the petition be and the same hereby is granted,
the Administrator's order be and the same hereby is revoked, and
the owner's rent restoration application be and the same hereby is
granted, effective December 1, 1991.
ISSUED:
JOSEPH A. D'AGOSTA
Acting Deputy Commissioner
|
