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   ADMINISTRATIVE REVIEW
          IN THE MATTER OF THE ADMINISTRATIVE      DOCKET Nos.:  GJ110223RT,
          APPEALS OF                               GJ130281RT,   GL130054RT
                    A WEISSBERG, CECILIA VENABLE
                    AND SHERRYLL REYNOLDS
                                                   RENT ADMINISTRATOR'S
                                                   DOCKET NO.:  EL130011RK
                                   PETITIONERS
          -------------------------------------X

          ORDER AND OPINION DENYING PETITIONS FOR ADMINISTRATIVE REVIEW UNDER 
          DOCKET NOS. GJ110223RT AND GJ130281RT AND DISMISSING PETITION FOR 
          ADMINISTRATIVE REVIEW UNDER DOCKET NO. GL130054RT

          On October 7, October 28, and December 14, 1992, the above named 
          petitioner-tenants filed petitions for administrative review (PARs) 
          against an order issued on September 30, 1992, by the Rent 
          Administrator (Gertz Plaza) concerning the housing accommodations 
          known as 20-21 Seagirt Blvd. apartment 1A, 20-35 Seagirt Blvd. 
          apartment 5C and 20-55 Seagirt Blvd apartment 4G, Far Rockaway, New 
          York, wherein the Rent Administrator granted major capital 
          improvement (MCI) rent increases based upon the installation of 
          elevator upgrading for 16 of the 38 buildings at the subject  
          building complex.  

          The Commissioner finds that the petition of the tenant in apartment 
          1A at 20-21 Seagirt Blvd (Docket No. GL130054RT) should be 
          dismissed as untimely since it was received by the Division on 
          December 14, 1992 and as such may not receive consideration at this 
          time pursuant to Section 2529.2 of the Rent Stabilization Code, 
          which requires that a petition for administrative review be filed 
          within 35 days from the issuance date of the Administrator's order.

          The Commissioner deems it appropriate to consolidate the remaining 
          two petitions for disposition since they pertain to the same order 
          and involve common issues of law and fact.

          In these petitions for administrative review, the tenants request 
          reversal of the Administrator's order.  The tenant of Apt. 4G 
          contends, in substance, that there was no elevator upgrading as the 
          owner only gave the inside of the elevators a facelift; and that 
          the elevators still break down.  The tenant of Apt. 5C contends, in 
          substance, that she is a new tenant to the premises and upon 
          accepting the apartment it was a right to have a clean and 
          operating elevator; and that the elevator has been inoperable on 
          several occasions.

          After a careful consideration of the entire evidence of record, the 
          Commissioner is of the opinion that these administrative appeals 
          should be denied.













          ADMIN. REVIEW DOCKET NOS. GJ110223RT ET AL

          With respect to the contention of the tenant in apartment 4G at 20- 
          55 Seagirt Blvd. that there was no elevator upgrading done, the 
          record herein discloses that the owner substantiated its MCI 
          application for the elevator work in the proceeding below by 
          submitting to the Administrator copies of the contract, cancelled 
          checks, the contractor's certification, and the B Form 73 Elevator 
          Equipment Use Permit issued by the Department of Buildings for the 
          work in question; and that the owner correctly complied with the 
          applicable procedures for a major capital improvement.

          Turning to the tenants' allegation that the elevators malfunction, 
          the Commissioner notes that there are no rent reduction orders 
          based on the owner's failure to maintain elevator services 
          outstanding against the subject premises.  The Commissioner takes 
          cognizance of the fact that the Department of Buildings inspects 
          elevators on a periodic basis to determine whether they are safe 
          and function properly and a review of their records disclosed that 
          there are no violations relating to elevators for the subject 
          premises.

          This determination is issued without prejudice to the right of the 
          tenants filing applications with the Division for a rent reduction 
          based upon a decrease in services, if the facts so warrant.

          THEREFORE, in accordance with the Rent Stabilization Law and Code, 
          it is

          ORDERED, that the petition under Docket No. GL130054RT be, and the 
          same hereby is dismissed; that the petitions under Docket Nos. 
          GJ110223RT and GJ130281RT be, and the same hereby are denied; and 
          that the Administrator's order be, and the same hereby is, 
          affirmed.

          ISSUED:



                                                       ____________________
                                                         Joseph A. D'Agosta
                                                        Deputy Commissioner











                                          2
    

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