ADM. REVIEW DOCKET NO.: BJ 130312 RO
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.:
BJ 130312 RO
:
RENT ADMINISTRATOR'S
DOCKET NO.:
BC 110035 OR
RICHARD ALBERT,
PREMISES: 93-49 222nd
Street, Apt. No. 1-X,
Queens Village, NY
PETITIONER :
------------------------------------X
ORDER AND OPINION DENYING PETITION FOR ADMINISTRATIVE REVIEW
The above-named owner timely filed a petition for
administrative review of an order issued on September 23, 1987
concerning the housing accommodations relating to the above-
described docket number wherein the Administrator granted the
owner's application for rent restoration effective May 1, 1987.
The issue in this appeal is whether the Administrator's order
restoring rent effective May 1, 1987 was warranted.
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.
The owner commenced this proceeding on March 11, 1987 by
filing an application to restore rent based on the restoration of
services.
On April 6, 1987, the Division sent the tenant a copy of the
owner's application. The Administrator's file does not contain any
answer from the tenant.
ADM. REVIEW DOCKET NO.: BJ 130312 RO
On July 28, 1987, a Division staff member made a physical
inspection of the subject apartment and confirmed the restoration
of services.
On September 23, 1987, the Administrator issued the order
hereunder review, restoring the rent effective May 1, 1987.
In the petition for administrative review, the owner contends
in substance that the order appealed from, which restored rent
effective May 1,1987, is in error and should be modified to an
order restoring rent effective August 1, 1986, the same date as the
order reducing rent. The owner explained that the earlier
effective date of the rent reduction order (August 1, 1986) should
be followed because said order was based on a condition which the
tenant, the superintendent and the inspector had agreed no longer
existed.
In answer, the tenant states in substance that she owes the
owner no arrears and that the rent reduction should continue.
The Commissioner is of the opinion that the petition should be
denied.
A review of the evidence of record shows that the
Administrator based his determination on the entire record,
including the results of the Division's July 16, 1987 inspection
report which confirmed the claim of restored services and the fact
that the Division sent on April 6, 1987 a copy of the owner's
application to the tenant. In this instance, the effective date of
rent restoration is the month following service of the owner's
application on the tenant, i.e. May 1, 1987. Accordingly, the
Administrator correctly determined the effective date of rent
restoration.
A search of the Division's records indicates a Commissioner's
order (BC 110227-RO) issued on October 29, 1987, granting the
owner's administrative appeal against the rent reduction order (AF
110653-S) and restoring rent June 1, 1987. The Administrator's
order hereunder review, with the effective date of May 1, 1987,
prevails because it is the earlier determination and is based on a
restoration proceeding. Accordingly, the May 1,1987 effective date
of the rent restoration order supersedes the June 1,1987 effective
date of the PAR order under Docket No. BC 110227 - RO.
THEREFORE, in accordance with the provisions of the Rent
Stabilization Law and Code, it is
ORDERED, that this petition be, and the same hereby is,
denied, and that the Administrator's order be, and the same hereby
ADM. REVIEW DOCKET NO.: BJ 130312 RO
is, affirmed.
ISSUED:
JOSEPH A. D'AGOSTA
Acting Deputy Commissioner
|
