Docket Number: BD 230065-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.: BD 230065-RO
:
1730 REALTY ASSOCIATES, DISTRICT RENT ADMINISTRATOR'S
DOCKET NO.: ZKCS-000401-B
PETITIONER :
------------------------------------X
ORDER AND OPINION GRANTING PETITION FOR ADMINISTRATIVE REVIEW
On April 8, 1987 the above-named petitioner-owner filed a Petition
for Administrative Review against orders issued on March 5, 1987 by
the District Rent Administrator, 92-31 Union Hall Street, Jamaica,
New York concerning housing accommodations known as 1730 East 18th
Street, Brooklyn, New York, various apartments wherein the District
Rent Administrator determined that the owner had failed to maintain
services and, based thereon, reduced the tenants' rent.
The applicable sections of the Law are Sections 9 NYCRR 2520.6 and
2525.2 of the Rent Stabilization Code, Section 26-514 of the Rent
Stabilization Law, and Sections 2201.2 and 2202.16 of the Rent and
Eviction Regulations for New York City.
The issue in this appeal is whether the District Rent
Administrator's order was warranted.
The Commissioner has reviewed all the evidence in the record and has
carefully considered that portion of the record relevant to the
issue raised by the administrative appeal.
This proceeding was originally commenced on December 6, 1985 by the
tenants filing a complaint of decrease in services in which they
alleged 14 different items of service decrease in the building.
In response the owner, addressing each item point by point, asserted
in substance that all services were being provided.
On April 17, 1986 a staff member of the Division conducted a
physical inspection of the subject premises and reported that the
laundry room was soiled, that the vestibule door was not locking,
that there was evidence of vermin infestation in two apartments,
that the public floors and lobby were soiled, that there was
evidence of the lobby walls peeling paint, that there was marking on
the walls, and that there was peeling paint around the 3rd floor
hall window. Upon reinspection on October 24, 1986 the only defect
noted was the peeling paint around the 3rd floor window; all
previously noted problems had been corrected.
On March 5, 1987 the District Rent Administrator issued orders
reducing the rent of the rent controlled tenants by $2.00 effective
the next rent payment date, and of the rent stabilized tenants by a
Docket Number: BD 230065-RO
Guidelines increase effective March 1, 1986.
In this petition the owner contends in substance that it did not
have any notice of any complaint regarding the item which formed the
basis of the rent reduction, and that in any event the item was de
minimus and did not warrant a rent reduction.
In answer, several tenants allege various items that were either not
complained of originally or else were found upon inspection not to
exist.
The Commissioner is of the opinion that this petition should be
granted.
Section 9 NYCRR 2525.2 of the Rent Stabilization Code requires an
owner to maintain the services described in Section 9 NYCRR 2520.6,
including hot water. Section 26-514 of the Rent Stabilization Law
mandates a reduction in rent upon a finding that the owner has
failed to maintain services. Section 2202.16 of the Rent and
Eviction Regulations for New York City grants the District Rent
Administrator power to order a decrease of the maximum rent
otherwise allowable for rent controlled apartments, where there has
been a decrease in essential services.
Item number 14 of the tenants' complaint had typed "[t]he lobby and
vestibule are extremely filthy and unkempt; both require painting as
well." The phrase "as public hallways and building exterior trim
and windows" was printed by hand after the "... as well." Given the
ambiguous language in the complaint, given that t e owner's point-
by-point answer did not evidence an awareness that peeling paint by
a 3rd floor window was being complained of, and given that the
owner, at least by the time of the reinspection, repaired every
single item mentioned in its answer, or in the tenant's complaint
other than the peeling 3rd floor paint which the Administrator
apparently took to be implied in the complaint, the Commissioner
does not consider the peeling paint by the window to constitute a
service decrease which the owner could be said to have been on
notice of. Accordingly, the Administrator's order finding a service
decrease and reducing the rent must be revoked.
Regarding the tenants' answers: If they feel that they are
currently experiencing service reductions, either of items not
originally complained of or of items which were found to be adequate
by the DHCR's inspector but which are now inadequate, they should
file individual or building-wide service decrease complaints as
appropriate.
If any tenant owes money to the owner as a result of this Order and
Opinion, the owner is hereby directed to allow such tenant to repay
such arrears in equal installments over the course of the next six
months. Should such tenant vacate after the issuance of this order,
or have previously vacated, said arrears shall be payable immediate
ly.
THEREFORE, in accordance with the Rent Stabilization Law and Code,
and the Rent and Eviction Regulations for New York City, it is
ORDERED, that this petition be, and the same hereby is, granted and
Docket Number: BD 230065-RO
that the District Rent Administrator's order be, and the same hereby
is, revoked.
ISSUED:
ELLIOT SANDER
Deputy Commissioner
|
