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.:
SURENDRA SINGH SETHI,
PETITIONER DOCKET NO.:
ORDER AND OPINION DENYING PETITION FOR ADMINISTRATIVE REVIEW
On January 28, 1992, the above-named petitioner-tenant filed a
petition for administrative review (PAR) of an order issued on
January 17, 1992, by the Rent Administrator, concerning the housing
accommodation known as 42-55 Colden Street, Apartment 9-T,
Flushing, New York, wherein the Administrator determined that the
owner was providing hot water services and accordingly denied the
complaint joined in by various tenants of lack of heat and hot
The Commissioner has reviewed all of the evidence in the record and
has carefully considered that portion of the record relevant to the
issues raised by the administrative appeal.
This proceeding was commenced by the filing by various tenants of
a complaint of lack of heat and hot water service building-wide.
Included with the complaint was a log maintained by a tenant
showing numerous heat and hot water complaints registered with the
city complaint hotline over a period of time.
An inspection of various apartments at the subject premises indi-
cated that water temperatures in both kitchen and bathroom equalled
or exceeded 120@, and the report filed by the Division's staff
inspector indicated that hot water was adequate at time of
inspection. Accordingly, the proceeding was terminated by the
Administrator by order issued January 17, 1992.
In the PAR, the tenant states that inadequate heat and hot water is
a frequent problem. Included with the PAR was a copy of the log of
heat and hot water complaints which had been previously submitted
below and which the petitioner contends is documentary evidence of
inadequate heat and hot water.
After careful consideration, the Commissioner is of the opinion
that the petition should be denied.
The evidence of record in this case, including the physical inspec-
tion of several apartments discloses that the owner was maintaining
adequate hot water. As the mean temperature on the day of inspec-
tion was above 55@, the complaint regarding inadequate heat could
not be investigated. It is not the policy of this Division to con-
duct multiple inspections over a period of time in order to verify
a tenant's complaint.
The petitioner has presented no evidence to indicate that the
inspection findings were not accurate at the time of inspection or
were not impartial. The log submitted below and again with the PAR
is insufficient to disturb the Administrator's Order.
THEREFORE, in accordance with the Rent Stabilization Law and Code,
and the Emergency Tenant Protection Act of 1974, it is
ORDERED, that this petition be, and the same hereby is, denied, and
that the Rent Administrator's order be, and the same hereby is,
JOSEPH A. D'AGOSTA