STATE OF NEW YORK
                            OFFICE OF RENT ADMINISTRATION
                                     GERTZ PLAZA
                               92-31 UNION HALL STREET
                               JAMAICA, NEW YORK 11433

          APPEAL OF                               DOCKET NO.:   
                 ARJAN MIRCHANDANI,
                                                  RENT ADMINISTRATOR'S
                                                  DOCKET NOS.:   
                                   PETITIONER     FG130165OR 


          On February 20, 1992, the above-named petitioner owner filed a 
          Petition for Administrative Review (PAR) against an order issued on 
          January 16, 1992, by the Rent Administrator at Gertz Plaza, 
          Jamaica, New York, concerning the housing accommodations known as  
          94-06 34th Road, Queens, New York, wherein the Administrator deter- 
          mined the owner's application to restore rent predicated on a 
          restoration of service.

          The challenged order denied rent restoration to rent stabilized 
          tenants based on the results of inspections conducted on December 
          13 and 16, 1991 and January 6, 1992 that found the bell/buzzer and 
          intercom systems to be defective.  The Administrator granted the 
          owner partial rent restoration to rent controlled tenants for other 
          services found to have been restored, and advised the owner to 
          refile for the remaining items.

          On appeal, the owner requests that the bell/buzzer intercom issue 
          be reconsidered, and that the balance of the rent reductions be 
          restored.  The owner asserts that a new intercom system has been 
          installed and will produce proof upon request.  

          The Administrator's determination was correct.  

          The owner has not indicated, either below or on appeal, when the 
          new intercom system was installed, or whether the intercom system 
          found to be defective on inspection was the existing equipment or 
          the new system recently installed.  If the equipment found to be 
          defective was the new equipment installed to restore or upgrade 
          services, the Administrator's determination was correct and rent 
          abatements were warranted.  The owner remained responsible to 
          insure that new equipment operates properly.


          If the installation of the new intercom system occurred after the 
          inspection, the determination was also correct, as the record 
          presented does not show that the owner advised the Rent Adminis- 
          trator of the measures taken to resolve intercom system problems by 
          removing the existing equipment.

          The owner's offer to produce proof of the installation upon request 
          is inadequate to warrant a different result.  An administrative 
          appeal is strictly limited to a review of the issues and evidence 
          before the Administrator, and not to consider new claims.

          THEREFORE, in accordance with the Rent and Eviction Regulations for 
          New York City, the City Rent Control Law, and the Rent Stabiliza- 
          tion Law and Code, it is,

          ORDERED, that this petition be, and the same hereby is, denied and 
          that the District Rent Administrator's order be, and the same 
          hereby is, affirmed.


                                                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