Docket Number:  AL 520644-RO
                                  STATE OF NEW YORK
                            OFFICE OF RENT ADMINISTRATION
                                     GERTZ PLAZA
                               92-31 UNION HALL STREET
                               JAMAICA, NEW YORK 11433

          APPEAL OF                              DOCKET NO.: AL  520644  RO
            JOHN DRAGO,                                     
                                                 DISTRICT RENT ADMINISTRATOR'S
                                                 DOCKET    NO.:    UC     002148-S

          On December 26, 1986, the above-named owner filed a  Petition  for
          Administrative Review of an order issued on December 5, 1986 by  a
          District Rent Administrator concerning the housing  accommodations
          known as (Apt. 2B), 740 West 187th Street,  New  York,  New  York,
          wherein the Administrator determined that the owner had failed  to
          maintain certain services and accordingly reduced the rent for the 
          subject accommodations.

          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 for review.

          The tenant commenced this proceeding on October  1,  1985  by  the
          filing  of  a  complaint  of  a  diminution  in  services.    More
          specifically, the tenant asserted  that  her  apartment  had  been
          painted in June 1985 and, with the exception of the  kitchen,  the
          paint had blistered.  The tenant further asserted that the plaster 
          on some of the walls was very lumpy.

          On October 28, 1985 the owner responded asserting that the tenant, 
          due  to  illness,  was  denying  access  to  the   plasterer   and
          painter/contractor, and that the tenant would consider the work in 
          April or May of 1986.  The owner said that he would do the work at 
          that time if she wished.

          On April 30, 1986, the tenant informed the Division of Housing and 
          Community Renewal (D.H.C.R.)  that  the  painting  and  plastering
          scheduled to be done in May 1986 would have to be  deferred  until
          her husband had recuperated.  The tenant  further,  in  substance,
          indicated, that, provided the conditions were not unbearable, they 
          were willing  to  wait  three  years  to  have  the  painting  and
          plastering done.

          On May 30, 1986, a rent agency  inspector  inspected  the  subject
          apartment and reported that, although the apartment was in need of 
          painting and replastering, the tenant had requested that  no  work
          be  done  in  the  subject  apartment  until   her   husband   had
          sufficiently recuperated from an illness, which she expected would 
          be in several months.

          Docket Number:  AL 520644-RO

          On September 29, 1986, the D.H.C.R. directed the owner to  send  a
          registered letter to the tenant, and a copy of  the  same  to  the
          D.H.C.R., informing the tenant at least 48 hours prior to the date 
          the repairs were to be made, of that date.  The owner was  advised
          that a failure to send such a notice would result in  a  reduction
          of the rent.

          On December 5, 1986 the  District  Rent  Administrator  issued  an
          order in which the rent for the subject apartment was  reduced  by
          $23.78 per month effective the first rent payment day following 
          the issuance date of the order  to  reflect  a  finding  that  the
          apartment required plastering and painting.

          On December 19, 1986 the tenant advised the D.H.C.R., among  other
          things,  that  she  and  her  husband  had  vacated  the   subject

          In a petition filed December 26, 1986 the owner asserts  that  the
          order issued by the Administrator should be  revoked  because  the
          owner contends that the necessary painting  and  plastering  would
          have been completed had the  tenant  not  prevented  access.   The
          owner encloses copies of his response to the  D.H.C.R.  notice  of
          September 29, 1986, directing him to send a registered  letter  to
          the tenant, advising the tenant, at least 48 hours  prior  to  the
          date repairs were to be made, of that date.  In that response, the 
          owner  had  asserted  that  the  tenant  had  requested  that  the
          repainting and replastering be done in October  1986.   The  owner
          also encloses a note from the painter, dated April  29,  1986,  in
          which the painter asserts that the tenant informed  him  that  she
          wanted the painting done in September  (1986);  a  note  from  the
          tenants to the owner, dated October 1, 1986,  informing  him  that
          they would be vacating the subject apartment on October 31,  1986,
          and a letter from the owner to the D.H.C.R.,  dated  November  17,
          1986, informing the D.H.C.R. that  the  tenants  had  vacated  the
          subject apartment on October 31, 1986 and  the  subject  apartment
          had been replastered and repainted.  The owner requested that  the
          docket be cancelled.

          After careful consideration, the Commissioner is  of  the  opinion
          that this petition should be granted.

          The record reveals that the repainting and replastering  work  was
          delayed at the tenant's  request.   Evidence  submitted  with  the
          petition indicates that the owner sent the  D.H.C.R.  a  memo,  in
          November 1986, indicating that the tenants had vacated the subject 
          premises on October 31, 1986 and that the services for which the 

          Docket Number:  AL 520644-RO

          rent was reduced had been  fully  restored  less  than  one  month
          following the tenants' vacancy, and before the order  was  issued.
          The record reveals that the owner's letter was not considered when 
          this  proceeding  was  before  the  District  Rent  Administrator.
          Therefore,  the  District  Rent  Administrator's  order  was   not
          warranted and should be revoked.

          THEREFORE, in accordance with the Rent  and  Eviction  Regulations
          for New York City, it is

          ORDERED, that this petition be, and the same hereby  is,  granted,
          and that the order of the District Rent Administrator be, and  the
          same hereby is, revoked.


                                          ELLIOT SANDER
                                          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