ADM. REVIEW DOCKET NO.: HD420065RO
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
IN THE MATTER OF THE ADMINISTRATIVE ADMINISTRATIVE REVIEW
APPEAL OF DOCKET NO.: HD420065RO
DISTRICT RENT
ADMINISTRATOR'S DOCKET
NICOLA BRUSCO NOS.: FF424119BR
GH420002BO
PETITIONER
------------------------------------X
ORDER AND OPINION DENYING PETITION FOR ADMINISTRATIVE REVIEW
The above-named owner filed a timely petition for
administrative review of an order issued concerning the housing
accommodations known as 200 West 85th Street, New York City 10024.
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 issue before the Commissioner is whether the
Administrator's order was correct.
The Administrator's order being appealed, GH420002BO was
issued on April 2, 1993. In that order, the Administrator affirmed
the finding of FF424119BR issued July 21, 1992, that the owner be
denied eligibility for a 1992/93 Maximum Base Rent (MBR) increase,
due to the owner's failure to meet the violation certification
requirements necessary to the owner's being granted an MBR
increase.
On appeal, the owner alleges that all violations have been
removed and that the building was completely renovated. The owner
also contends that he is waiting for a new Certificate of occupancy
to be sent. The owner provides no documentation in support of this
assertion.
The Commissioner is of the opinion that this petition should
be denied.
ADM. REVIEW DOCKET NO.: HD420065RO
A list of Pending Violations discloses that, as of January 1,
1991 there were (11) eleven Rent Impairing Violations and one
hundred fifty-four (154) non-rent Impairing Violations of record
against the subject premises.
Section 2202.3(h) of the N.Y.C. Rent and Eviction Regulations
provides that, in order to gain eligibility to increase MBRs at a
particular premises the owner must certify to the DHCR that 80% of
the non-rent impairing (and 100% of the Rent impairing) Violations
of record at that particular premises one year before the effective
date of the order of eligibility have been repaired by six months
before the effective date. In the instant proceeding, the owner
had to certify that 80% of the non rent impairing Violations of
record at the subject premises as of January 1, 1992 had been
repaired by June 30, 1991.
As indicated above, the owner has not presented any evidence
on appeal in support of its contention.
THEREFORE, in accordance with the provisions of the Rent and
Eviction Regulations, it is
ORDERED, that this petition for Administrative Review be, and
the same hereby is, denied, and that the Order of the Rent
Administrator be, and the same hereby is, affirmed.
ISSUED:
JOSEPH A. D'AGOSTA
Deputy Commissioner
|
