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.: GG110239RT
Charles Roond, RENT ADMINISTRATOR'S
DOCKET NO.: GC110035HW
94-30 59th. Ave., Apt.6C
ORDER AND OPINION DENYING PETITION FOR ADMINISTRATIVE REVIEW
The above-named tenant filed a timely petition for administrative
review of an order issued on July 13, 1992 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 tenant commenced this proceeding on March 9, 1992 by filing a
complaint asserting that the owner had failed to maintain adequate
hot water services in the subject apartment.
In answer, the owner submitted copies of invoices related to repair
work in the boiler.
Thereafter, an inspection of the subject apartment was conducted on
May 7, 1992 by a DHCR staff member who reported the kitchen hot
water temperature at 135@F and the bathroom hot water temperature at
By an order dated July 13, 1992, the Administrator terminated the
proceeding, finding that the hot water temperature in the kitchen
and the bathroom was adequate.
In its petition for administrative review, the tenant contends in
substance that inadequate services continue to exist. Attached are
copies of announcements that there would be no hot water and/or heat
on various dates of January through September 1993.
In answer, the owner stated that the tenant should address the
issues to the co-op board and sponsor; and that the conditions has
since been corected.
In reply, the tenant asserted that the owner or its agents do not
represent the petitioner as rent-stabilized tenant but the co-op
shareholders; and that as indicated in the attached copy of a
shareholder meeting fact sheet, the boiler/burner need replacement.
After careful consideration, the Commissioner is of the opinion that
the petition should be denied.
The petition fails to rebut the Administrator's determination based
on a May 7, 1992 on-site inspection, which confirmed that the hot
water services were adequate. The allegations of inadequate hot
water services subsequent to the issuance of the order and the need
for replacing the boiler/burner as shown by a copy of a co-op fact
sheet submitted for the first time on appeal are beyond the scope of
administrative review. Accordingly, the determination was in all
respects proper and is hereby sustained.
THEREFORE, in accordance with the Rent Stabilization Law and Code,
ORDERED, that this petition be, and the same hereby is, denied, and
that the Administrator's order be, and the same hereby is, affirmed.
JOSEPH A. D'AGOSTA