DOCKET NO.: EL420162RO
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. EL420162RO
ARTHUR SOYBEL DOCKET NO. CJ420062BT
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 599
West End Avenue, Apts. 2A, 3A, 12A, PHE, New York, NY.
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
A tenant residing at the subject premises filed with the Administrator
a Challenge to the order granting the owner eligibility to raise
Maximum Base Rents (MBRs) at the subject premises for the 1988/89
cycle, said order issue on August 9, 1988 under the Docket # BL422299
BR. Based on the tenant's Challenge, the Administrator issued the
order under review herein on November 16, 1988 under Docket #CL420062
BT, in which order the Administrator revoked the owner's eligibility.
In that order the Administrator determined that the owner had failed
to meet the violation requirements in order to qualify for an MBR
increase. The Administrator also found that violation item # 320 had
not been cleared.
On appeal the owner contends that violation # 320 by its nature
(failure to place a sign in the lobby designating the location of a key
to the boiler room) "did not affect the use of (any of the four subject
apartments) in any way and the tenants had full enjoyment of their
apartments." As proof that violation # 320 has been cleared, the owner
includes with his appeal a copy of an Affidavit of the Managing Agent
of the subject premises. In the Affidavit (dated November 28, 1990),
the Agent testifies that he became Managing Agent on May 1, 1987, and
that during that month he noted the lack of a sign and replaced it.
The Commissioner is of the opinion that this petition should be denied.
On September 20, 1990, the New York City Department of Housing
DOCKET NO.: EL420162RO
Preservation and Development (HPD) conducted an inspection of the
subject premises. This inspection revealed that the owner had failed
to clear a sufficient number of violations from the subject premises
in order to gain eligibility to raise MBRs at the subject premises for
the 1988/89 cycle.
The owner's argument on appeal was that the persistence of violation
#320 was irrelevant to the tenants' use of their own apartments; and
that as the owner of the co-op apartments he could not be held
responsible for such violations.
The HPD inspection report is the best evidence as to the status of
violation #320; and the Commissioner is of the opinion that violation
#320 was, despite the evidence offered by the owner on appeal not
timely cleared. The fact that the housing accommodations in question
are under co-op ownership does not change the requirements for MBR
The Commissioner notes that in her Challenge below, the tenant raised
various questions concerning the amount of the owner's MBR increase.
The instant proceeding is concerned only with the owner's eligibility
to raise MBRs at the subject premises and not with the amount of the
increase, nor with the computation of the increase. The tenant is
advised to request a Rent Registration Update from this agency if still
in doubt about her legal rent. For more information she can call (718)
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.
JOSEPH A. D'AGOSTA