Docket No. IF120018RP(BK130362RO)
                                    STATE OF NEW YORK 
                            OFFICE OF RENT ADMINISTRATION
                                     GERTZ PLAZA
                               92-31 UNION HALL STREET
                              JAMAICA, NEW YORK  11433

          ------------------------------------X   S.J.R. No. 7227
          APPEAL OF                               DOCKET NO. IF120018RP  
                                                  DISTRICT RENT             
          SKILLMAN QUEENS                         ADMINISTRATOR'S DOCKET
          REALTY COMPANY,                         NO. 7MBC000117Q(7MI02351Q) 


               The above-named landlord filed a petition for administrative 
          review of an order issued by the Rent Administrator concerning 
          various housing accommodations in the premises known as 43-34 49th 
          Street, Sunnyside, New York.

               On September 24, 1993, the Commissioner issued an order and 
          opinion issued under Docket No. BK130362RO which denied the 
          landlord's petition.

               Subsequently, the landlord commenced a proceeding in the 
          Supreme Court of the State of New York-Queens County pursuant to 
          Article 78 of the Civil Practice Law and Rules, seeking review of 
          the above-mentioned Commissioner's order.

               After considering the Article 78 petition, the Court issued an 
          order remitting the proceeding to the New York State Division of 
          Housing and Community Renewal (D.H.C.R.) for further consideration.

               The rent agency redocketed the proceeding under the above- 
          referenced docket number, IF120018RP.

               The Commissioner has reviewed all of the evidence in the 
          record and has carefully considered that portion of the record 
          relevant to the issues raised by the petition for administrative 

               The Administrator issued an "Interim Order" on September 18, 
          1986 which granted the landlord maximum base rent (M.B.R.) 
          increases for the 1986-1987 period effective January 1, 1986.  The 
          Administrator issued an order on August 7, 1987 under Docket No. 

          Docket No. IF120018RP(BK130362RO)

          7MI02351Q which denied the landlord M.B.R. increases for the 1986- 
          1987 period as it was determined that the landlord has not cleared 
          the requisite number of violations pending against the subject 

               On September 4, 1987, the subject landlord filed a challenge 
          to the above-mentioned order.

               In the order under review herein issued on October 2, 1987 
          under Docket No. 7MBC000117Q17Q(7MI02351Q), the Administrator denied 
          the landlord's challenge and affirmed the aforementioned order 
          issued under Docket No. 7MI02351Q.

               In the landlord's petition it asserts, among other things, 
          that on January 1, 1985 there were six violations pending against 
          the subject building on record with the New York City Department of 
          Housing Preservation and Development (H.P.D.); that all six 
          violations were timely cured; that two of the violations pertain to 
          broken or defective windows located in apartment 6A; that the 
          tenant of the above-mentioned apartment filed a complaint with the 
          New York City Conciliation And Appeals Board (C.A.B), the agency 
          formerly charged with enforcement of the Rent Stabilization Law 
          prior to April 1, 1984; in the complaint, the tenant alleged that 
          the windows in the above-mentioned apartment were defective; that, 
          the landlord asserts, the windows were repaired; that an inspection 
          report issued by H.P.D. pertaining to the windows in apartment 6A 
          "found no cause for complaint," and that D.H.C.R. issued a letter, 
          dated April 16, 1984, "indicating that no violations existed in the 

               To its petition the landlord attaches, among other things, a 
          copy of the above-mentioned tenant's complaint filed with the 
          C.A.B. dated January 24, 1984; a copy of the above-mentioned H.P.D. 
          inspection report dated April 3, 1984, and a copy of the above- 
          mentioned letter issued by the D.H.C.R. on April 16, 1984.

               After careful consideration, the Commissioner finds that the 
          landlord's petition should be granted.

               It should be noted that in the above-mentioned order issued on 
          September 24, 1993 under Docket No. BK130362RO, the Commissioner 
          had determined that there were six non-rent impairing violations on 
          record with the H.P.D.; that, pursuant to the applicable rent 
          regulations, to qualify for an M.B.R. increase for the 1986-1987 
          period the landlord had to clear at least five of the six pending 
          violations on record with the H.P.D.; that the subject landlord had 
          cleared only four of the six violations; that the violations that 
          were not cleared pertained to the windows inside Apartment 6A, and 
          that the landlord had not cleared the requisite number of 
          violations to qualify for an M.B.R. increase for the 1986-1987 

          Docket No. IF120018RP(BK130362RO)

               The record reflects that the subject landlord submitted a 
          violation certification form, dated June 7, 1985, for the 1986-1987 
          M.B.R. cycle.

               The record further reflects that the H.P.D.-Office of Rent and 
          Housing Maintenance conducted an inspection of the subject building 
          on April 14, 1986 which noted that the two non-rent impairing 
          violations relating to the windows in apartment 6A were not 

               The Commissioner points out that in the aforementioned order 
          issued by the Supreme Court, which remitted this proceeding to the 
          D.H.C.R., the Judge stated, among other things, that: "Any 
          inspections subsequent to the certification date are to be 
          disregarded." (Emphasis by the Court.)

               As the inspection conducted on April 14, 1986 by the H.P.D.- 
          Office of Rent and Housing Maintenance occurred after the 
          certification date of June 7, 1985, the Commissioner finds that, 
          pursuant to the above-mentioned Court order, that inspection is not 
          relevant as to the issues raised in this proceeding.

               The Commissioner points out that the aforementioned inspection 
          report dated April 3, 1984, and the letter issued by the D.H.C.R. 
          on April 16, 1984, both noted that the tenant's assertions in the 
          complaint filed with the C.A.B. pertaining to the windows in 
          Apartment 6A were not warranted.

               As it is the law of the case that inspections occurring after 
          the certification date are to be"disregarded" in determining the 
          issues in this proceeding; and the letter issued by the D.H.C.R. on 
          April 16, 1984 determined that there were no violations in 
          Apartment 6A, the Commissioner finds, pursuant to the directives of 
          the aforementioned court order, that the two violations on record 
          with the H.P.D. pertaining to the windows in Apartment 6A were 
          timely cleared.

               Accordingly, the Commissioner finds that the subject landlord 
          has met the requisite requirements to qualify for M.B.R. increases 
          for the 1986-1987 period effective January 1, 1986, pursuant to the 
          applicable rent regulations.

               The Commissioner further finds that the Administrator's order 
          issued on October 2, 1987 under Docket No. 7MBC000117Q(7MI02351Q) 
          should be revoked; and that the M.B.R. and maximum rent increases 
          should be calculated pursuant to the directives in the 
          aforementioned interim M.B.R. order of eligibility issued on 
          September 18, 1986.

               THEREFORE, in accordance with the City Rent and Rehabilitation 
          Law and Rent and Eviction Regulations, it is

          Docket No. IF120018RP(BK130362RO)

               ORDERED, that the landlord's petition be, and the same hereby 
          is, granted, and that the Administrator's order, issued under 
          Docket No. 7MBC000117Q(7MI02351Q), be, and the same hereby is, 
          revoked; and it is

               FURTHER ORDERED, that the subject landlord has qualified for 
          M.B.R. increases for the 1986-1987 period effective January 1, 
          1986; and it is

               FURTHER ORDERED, that the maximum rent and M.B.R. increases 
          shall be calculated pursuant to the directives in the interim 
          M.B.R. order of eligibility issued on September 18, 1986; and it is

               FURTHER ORDERED, that the subject tenants may pay any 
          retroactive rent arising as a result of this order in one or more 
          lump sum payments or, at the tenants' option, in equal monthly 
          installments equal in number to the number of months between 
          January 1, 1986 and the issuance date of this order, and it is

               FURTHER ORDERED, that if a subject tenant vacates after the 
          issuance of this order that tenant's retroactive rent shall be due 


                                             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