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

          APPEAL OF                                    DOCKET NO.: HJ420241RT

                    Goldie Kleiner,
                                                       RENT ADMINISTRATOR'S
                                                       DOCKET NO.: GF420101OR



          On October 13, 1993, the above-named petitioner-tenant filed a 
          petition for administrative review (PAR) of an order issued on 
          September 15, 1993, by the Rent Administrator, concerning the 
          housing accommodation known as 295 Central Park West, New York, 
          N.Y., Apt. PH-A, wherein the Administrator partially granted the 
          owner's application for rent restoration.

          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 administrative appeal.

          The issue herein is whether the Rent Administrator properly granted 
          the owner's application for rent restoration in part.

          On May 11, 1992, the owner filed an application for rent 
          restoration alleging that it had restored all those services which 
          were the subject of the Rent Administrator's  rent reduction order 
          of March 1, 1990, issued under Docket No. CL420619S.

          The tenant filed an answer to the application alleging, in part, 
          that she needed an extension of time to answer the application due 
          to recent surgery.  She also stated that the statements in the 
          application are untrue.

          A DHCR inspection conducted on July 7, 1993, revealed that the 
          owner had restored window weather-stripping and the living room 


          ceiling but had failed to restore the living room window sill, the 
          kitchen window sill, the dining room window sill, the kitchen 
          ceiling and the dining room ceiling.

          On appeal, the petitioner-tenant asserted, in pertinent part, that 
          the owner had not fully restored all services enumerated in the 
          rent reduction order and that she did not receive a copy of the 
          owner's rent restoration application.

          The petition was served on the owner on December 2, 1993, and on 
          December 10, 1993, the owner filed an answer to the petition 
          stating that the appealed order should be upheld because it was 
          based on findings of a DHCR inspector.

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

          The owner, on proof of restoration of those services which were the 
          subject of the Rent Administrator's reduction order is, by law, 
          entitled to an order of rent restoration.

          A review of the record reveals that the rent reduction order of 
          March 1, 1990, reduced the rent based on the owner's failure to 
          maintain seven services.

          The DHCR inspection of July 7, 1993, confirmed that the owner had 
          restored two of the seven services specified in the rent reduction 
          order and in reliance on this report, the Rent Administrator 
          partially restored the rent in the amount of $7.00 per month.

          The Commissioner notes that the tenant's PAR merely stated that the 
          owner failed to restore all services enumerated in the rent 
          reduction order.

          This is, however, exactly what the Rent Administrator determined in 
          partially granting the application.

          Accordingly, the tenant's petition fails to establish that the Rent 
          Administrator improperly granted the owner's application in part.

          The Commissioner further notes that contrary to the tenant's 
          allegations on appeal, the record demonstrates that the tenant was 
          served with a copy of the application on July 13, 1992 and that the 
          tenant actually answered the application on August 1, 1992.

          Therefore, the Commissioner finds that the Administrator properly 
          based his determination on the entire record, including the results 
          of the on-site inspection conducted on July 7, 1993 and that the 
          Administrator properly granted in part the owner's application to 


          restore the rent.

          THEREFORE, in accordance with the provisions of the Rent and 
          Eviction Regulations for New York City, 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
                                             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