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

          APPEAL OF                                    DOCKET NOS.:
                    Bucknell Realty Company,
                                                       RENT ADMINISTRATOR'S
                                                       DOCKET NOS.:

                              FOR ADMINISTRATIVE REVIEW

          The above-named owner filed timely petitions for administrative 
          review of orders concerning the housing accommodations known as 44- 
          35 Colden Street, Brooklyn, New York, wherein the Rent 
          Administrator determined the owner's application to restore rent 
          previously reduced per Docket No. DG110315S.

          The Commissioner has reviewed all the evidence in the records and 
          has carefully considered those portions of the records relevant to 
          the issues raised by the petitions.

          The tenant initially commenced these proceedings by filing a 
          complaint alleging various defects in the windows throughout the 
          apartment including a complaint that the windows were difficult to 
          open and close.

          The Rent Administrator granted a rent reduction (DG110315S) based 
          on inspection reports that indicated, among other things, that the 
          living room windows did not have handles.  The inspector's report 
          had not made clear whether the handles were missing or whether they 
          were needed to maneuver the window sashes.

          The Rent Administrator denied the owner's initial rent restoration 
          application (EJ110052OR) on the grounds that the living room 


          windows were missing handles, notwithstanding that the inspector's 
          report noted that there was no evidence of handles ever being 
          present or installed on the living room windows.  However, the 
          owner had represented in the application that all repairs for which 
          the rent reduction order was issued had been completed, including 
          the installation of handles for the living room windows.

          The owner sought reconsideration of denial of the application 
          (EJ110052OR) and at the same time filed a new rent restoration 
          application (FJ110047OR).

          The Rent Administrator issued an order on reconsideration 
          (FK110022RK) that modified the previous denial of the application 
          (EJ110052OR) to reflect that the living room windows were difficult 
          to open and close, but did not restore the rent.

          The owner did not seek administrative appeal of the rent reduction 
          order (DG110315S), the initial denial of rent restoration 
          (EJ110052OR) or the reconsideration order thereof (FK110022RK).  
          Therefore, each of these determinations was rendered final.

          Although new rent restoration proceedings were pending 
          (FJ110047OR), the owner sought to modify the reconsideration order 
          (FK110022RK) by filing yet another rent restoration application 

          On May 15, 1992, the Rent Administrator issued an order granting 
          the owner's rent restoration application (FJ110047OR) effective 
          November 1, 1991, based on the tenant's signed written statement 
          dated April 26, 1992 that handles had been installed on the living 
          room windows.  The owner filed a petition for administrative review 
          seeking modification of the order, as more fully set forth below.

          In its petition for administrative review (GF110061RO) appealing 
          the May 15, 1992 order (FJ110047OR), the owner argues that the rent 
          restoration order should not state handles on the living room 
          windows to be a service, and that the owner was entitled to have 
          the rent restored effective September 1, 1989, the effective date 
          of the underlying rent reduction order, based on the fact that the 
          Rent Administrator's March 12, 1992 order under FK110022RK 
          acknowledged that handles in the living room windows should not 
          have been a basis for a rent reduction.

          On July 27, 1993, the Rent Administrator issued an order that also 
          granted the owner's remaining rent restoration application 
          (GD110015OR) effective June 1, 1992, based on the tenant's signed 
          statement dated July 12, 1993 that all living room windows were 


          working properly and the windows had locks.  The owner filed a 
          petition for administrative review seeking modification of the 
          order, also more fully set forth below.

          In its petition for administrative review (HH110092RO) of the July 
          27, 1993 order (GD110015OR), the owner argues that the rent 
          restoration date therein should have conformed to the November 1, 
          1991 effective date set forth on the May 15, 1992 order 
          (FJ110047OR).  The owner also pointed out that window locks had not 
          been an issue or a service problem since the July 24, 1991 order 

          After careful consideration, the Commissioner is of the opinion 
          that the owner's petitions should be granted in part.

          The owner's failure to seek administrative review of the Rent 
          Administrator's order per Docket Nos. DG110315S, EJ110052OR and 
          FK110022RK rendered those determinations final and they can no 
          longer be appealed.  

          The owner's request under PAR Docket No. GF110061RO to modify the 
          effective rent restoration date set forth in the order under Docket 
          No. FJ110047OR, from November 1, 1991 to September 1, 1989 
          constitutes an impermissible collateral attack on the Rent 
          Administrator's prior final orders that were not appealed.  The 
          owner is correct, however, that the service the tenant is entitled 
          to is operable windows.

          The owner's petition (HH110092RO) appealing the Rent 
          Administrator's July 27, 1993 order (GD110015OR) properly points 
          out that the determination should have taken notice of the prior 
          order (FJ110047OR), wherein the rent was restored effective 
          November 1, 1991.  To the extent that the rent was previously 
          restored per Docket No. FJ110047OR, the issue of the effective date 
          of the rent restoration was moot and should not have been 
          considered; it is hereby deleted from the Rent Administrator's July 
          27, 1993 order (GD110015OR).  To the extent that the order 
          (GD110015OR) reflects that services were restored, the order is 

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

          ORDERED, that these petitions be, and the same hereby are granted, 
          in part, and that the Rent Administrator's orders (FJ110047OR; 
          GD110015OR) be, and the same hereby are, affirmed, as modified in 


          accordance with the above.        

                                             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