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.: HK510108RT
David Parson, RENT ADMINISTRATOR'S
25 Arden Street
New York, NY
ORDER AND OPINION DENYING PETITION FOR ADMINISTRATIVE REVIEW
The above-named tenant filed a timely petition for administrative
review of an order issued on October 20, 1993 by the Rent
Administrator granting the owner's application to restore rent
based on the restoration of services.
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 owner commenced this proceeding on December 4, 1991 by filing an
application to restore rent based on the restoration of services for
which a rent reduction order was issued on April 29, 1987 under
Docket No. ZAG510398S.
The Commissioner notes that other services cited in the rent
reduction order ZAG510398S were found to have been restored by the
Administrator's determinations under Docket Nos. ZBL410008OR issued
on June 23, 1988 and ZFC510175OR issued on August 5, 1991. The only
remaining defective conditions at issue in this proceeding were the
peeling paint and plaster on the kitchen walls and ceiling, the
bedroom ceiling and walls, the hall ceiling and the living room
In answer, the tenant denied the allegations and otherwise asserted
in substance that defective conditions continue to exist.
On March 4, 1993, an inspection of the subject apartment was
conducted by a DHCR staff member who found no evidence of peeling
paint and plaster on the kitchen walls and ceiling, living room
ceiling, hallway ceiling or the bedroom walls or ceiling.
The Commissioner notes that the March 4, 1993 inspection cited new
defective conditions in the bathroom, which are not at issue in this
rent restoration proceeding.
By an order dated October 20, 1993, the Administrator granted the
owner's application to restore rent.
In this petition, the tenant contends in substance that defective
conditions continue to exist.
DHCR mailed a copy of the petition to the owner.
After careful consideration, the Commissioner is of the opinion that
the petition should be denied.
The tenant's petition does not establish any basis to modify or
revoke the Administrator's determination based on the March 4, 1993
inspection and previous findings under Docket Nos. ZBL410008OR and
ZFC510175OR, which in totality verified the restoration of services.
THEREFORE, in accordance with the Rent Stabilization Law and Code
Operational Bulletin 84-1, it is
ORDERED, that this petition be, and the same hereby is, denied, and
that the Administrator's order be, and the same hereby is, affirmed.
JOSEPH A. D'AGOSTA